Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Predrag Gosta

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep Deville (Talk) 15:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Predrag Gosta

1. The username is Pgosta. The subject probably wrote this. 2. If you read it carefully it is written in a self promoting way. 3. The Awards and Recognitions section contains accomplishments which can not be verified by other sources and would only be known by the subject. This article was written by the subject. The external links are basically advertisements for his websites.

ALSO: Later the subject apparently edited the page two different times without logging in and his IP addresses were logged. Guess what? The IP addresses are out of Atlanta, GA, which is where Predrag Gosta lives. Try it yourself using I used http://www.arin.net/whois/

Here are the IPs:

65.13.29.28
24.30.53.95

65.13.29.28 has also done the following:

06:58, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Josip Broz Tito
06:52, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (→Socialist Republics and Autonomous Provinces)
06:34, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Georgia State University (→Notable Alumni)
06:33, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Georgia State University (→External link)
06:33, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) John B. Haberlen
06:31, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Georgia State University
06:31, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Georgia State University
06:29, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Predrag Gosta (→External links)
06:28, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) List of famous Atlantans (→Musicians, actors and other entertainers)
06:21, 4 June 2005 (hist) (diff) Predrag Gosta
23:06, 13 March 2005 (hist) (diff) Music conservatory
23:04, 13 March 2005 (hist) (diff) Trinity College of Music
06:43, 13 March 2005 (hist) (diff) Milla Jovovich
17:20, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) Baroque violin
17:13, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) Baroque violinist
17:01, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) Early Music Network
16:56, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) Baroque orchestra
16:54, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) Baroque orchestra
16:50, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) List of period instruments
16:45, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) List of period instruments
16:37, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) Orchestra (→United States)
15:51, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) Georgia State University
15:36, 7 February 2005 (hist) (diff) List of harpsichordists
19:05, 27 December 2004 (hist) (diff) Yugoslavia
19:04, 27 December 2004 (hist) (diff) January 14 (→1950-1999)
18:50, 27 December 2004 (hist) (diff) Claudio Monteverdi

If you put the puzzle pieces together with him having an apparently Yugoslavian name, the above shows that the subject of this article is also the AUTHOR. Let's keep Wikipedia from being a MYSPACE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by N00b33 (talk • contribs)

Keep and revise— Agree that the author of an article should not promote himself. And the AfD nomination makes an extremely compelling case that this is most probably self promotion. That said, the source is not automatic reason for deletion; it is an automatic reason for editing to exclude those things which can not be independently verified. There are legitimate independent internet articles confirming Predrag Gosta's existence and suggesting/supporting notability. See example 1, Amazon example, The Gwinnett Ballet Theatre Orchestra, Predrag Gosta Conducting and so forth. Let’s fix the article, but let’s keep the article. Williamborg (Bill) 15:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~Weak Delete. Wow... at first I was going to complain about your lengthy nomination, but it's clearly needed with such a complicated web of blatant self-promotion. I think everything posted by the author should be tagged for NPOV. I would agree with Williamborg that the Ballet has at least borderline notability and verifiability. But does this confer notability on its creator? I'm skeptical. It's also very weak on the verifiability for Predrag Gosta. In another case I might be more inclined to give it the benefit of the doubt, but such an agregious violation of WP:AUTO holds some weight as well. Irongargoyle 15:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Based on the fact that N00b33 seems to be a single purpose account I'm backing off a bit. I stand by all my other statements though. Irongargoyle 15:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and revise per Williamborg (Bill). The article does a decent job of arguing for notability, although I strongly agree all awards, honors, etc need citations as quickly as possible. The article author could very well have intended self-promotion but unless s/he blocks others who make good faith edits to it, I would say let wiki-darwinism make the article what it should be. -Markeer 16:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep on the understanding that non-POV elements are removed. Subject appears to be notable. Mallanox 17:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm uneasy on this one. Much that I'm normally inclusionist on such matters. The self-promotion is unmistakable, and the notability is not quite evident to me. Of the prizes listed, most may just be minor student-level awards. And the early music ensemble he founded doesn't seem to have gone much beyond regional notablility. They've produced some CDs that apparently won some (modest) acclaim, but I can't quickly find much on the web in terms of independent critical acclaim for the conductor, or reviews in major music journals. The CDs were all produced by Gosta's own firm, Edition Lilac (another article created by Gosta himself). Borderline case for me. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable.-Kmaguir1 05:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Comment: More important facts found by careful research...

In this revision, a non-musical award was listed and then later was deleted. There is no way anyone could know about this award except the subject. "Revision as of 03:03, 13 March 2005 The Internatinal High IQ Society"

The following link shows that John Holloway first performed with the subject's orchestra in February 26, 2005: http://www.johnholloway.org/calendar.htm A month later, John Holloway is shown as golden history in this revision:
"Revision as of 03:42, 13 March 2005
He collaborated with famous musicians such as violinist John Holloway, sopranos Emma Kirby and Evelyn Tubb, recorder virtuoso Marion Verbruggen, harpist Andrew Lawrence-King and many others." Intresting timing.

Something else few would know of.

"Revision as of 03:41, 13 March 2005; Affiliate Guest Lecturer, Georgia State University, Atlanta (2003-present)"

In this revision, a photo was uploaded with an interesting filename which was apparently changed later. A google for the filename brought no results. Seems to have been uploaded by the subject.

"Revision as of 04:43, 27 January 2006 Image:Pedja-ChairFront-color-300x400.jpg"

The subject's birthday is listed but not be found anywhere else online to confirm except sites which mirror Wikipedia: [1]

Let's not forget what the Wikipedia guidelines say: [2]

Creating an article about yourself

Creating or editing an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it will likely be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to Wikipedia:No original research, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, and Wikipedia:Verifiability.

Irongargoyle says: "I think everything posted by the author should be tagged for NPOV." Take a look at his other stuff. I think Irongargoyle is right.

MALLANOX, the subject only "appears to be notable" (as you say) by self-promotion. Take the time to do your research and I am sure you will agree.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by N00b33 (talk • contribs) , Comments formatted by Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ok, I'm not wild about the idea that he has created most of the blue links off of his page. (If anyone is interested, nearly all of his "collaborators" (remember what that term used to mean?) have wikipedia entries because he made them). I can buy CDs on which he acted as conductor, not only from his own site but from others, Amazon etc. To me that makes him notable. I'd strip his entry down to bare basics and allow others to build it back up. Mallanox 11:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: To be fair, some of the names mentioned (Anthony Rooley, Emma Kirkby, Evelyn Tubb) are truly top notch. When Gosta created their articles, he was doing good encyclopedic work. Maybe he should then have spent more time expanding their articles than his own. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Mallanox, Anyone can be a seller of their own products at Amazon. Does that make them notable? http://www.amazon.com/b/ref=gw_m_b_si/002-7780941-2049636?ie=UTF8&node=3309511 Future Perfect at Sunrise, As far the artists he has worked with, a little web research shows that some of these artists were "collaborated with" by the subject in a college course setting: http://www.goldbergweb.com/en/interpreters/conductors/11306.php He attended numerous masterclasses and courses, particularly in historical performance, under the direction of well-known artists such as Emma Kirkby, Evelyn Tubb, Anthony Rooley, and others.

-N00b33

Well, according to his resume here [3] he did actually perform with them, and he definitely had Evelyn Tubb in his Dido recording, that much is verifiable. Tending towards a solution of keep but re-stub as per Mallanox above. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as my account being called a single purpose account, think of it this way: I am strongly considering taking up wikiing as a hobby as it allows me a venue for one of my favorite pastimes -- web research. I consider the debate here as test. Does Darwinism work? I am perusing Wikipedia and stumble on what seems the subject's laughable self promotion and wonder, "Is this myspace?" Now I am at a place where I wonder whether this is a place I want to contribute my time to or not.

-N00b33

Well, careful. You do come across like someone who has a personal axe to grind with Gosta. You were certainly right in drawing attention to the problems here, but please make sure you don't overstretch it so you aren't seen as "wikistalking". Just a bit of advice. (Oh, and please could you sign your contributions with "~~~~" to get your proper signature inserted? Thank you!) Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Future Perfect at Sunrise: Thanks for the advice. I can see where it would come across that way as I tend to enjoy a good debate and have been known to go to extremes. Oh...I will now try to sign properly... Yay, it worked! N00b33 01:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)N00b33[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.