Talk:Michael Gira

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

Fair use rationale for Image:Michael Gira in Moscow by Cheslav Merk.jpg[edit]

Image:Michael Gira in Moscow by Cheslav Merk.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 14:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personal life section?[edit]

M. Gira has a wife and a daughter (from what I know)

CRAVEONLINE: Who is that singing behind Devondra Bernhardt on “You Fucking People Make Me Sick”?

GIRA: That’s my three and half year old daughter


CRAVEONLINE: Really? She has a great voice.

GIRA: (Laughs) It’s interesting that song because unlike the others it really started from nothing. It started with tape loops and different odd sounds that had nothing to do with what ended up on the record. It was supposed to be just a one or two minute transitional piece but I kept building on it and moving it around and figuring out how to deal with it. I ended up with this little ditty in the middle so I went home and recorded my own voice and thought, “who do I sound like”.

Then it dawned on me I sounded like Devondra so I called him and he agreed to sing on it. That led to me thinking about other things so I got these mandolins, Grasshopper from Mercury Rev played about twenty tracks of mandolins. Aside from some christof arpeggios and some juice harps at the beginning there’s nothing left of what was there originally.


CRAVEONLINE: Devondra sounds just like you, I had no idea it was him when I first heard the song.

GIRA: It’s funny with that song because unless people are told they just think it’s me singing. I sent him a tape of the song and he sang my melody so I guess subconsciously he sang it in a lower registe

http://www.craveonline.com/music/interviews/134144-swans-frontman-michael-gira#sthash.vTVTHsUJ.dpuf

Mulholland Drive[edit]

He played The Cowboy in Mulholland Drive.Cromulant (talk) 03:04, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No he didn't, that was Monty Montgomery (see the IMDB page for Mulholland Dr.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.168.128.8 (talk) 16:48, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Accused rape?[edit]

Should we discuss Larkin Grimm's recent accusation in the article? I mean, just make it known, considering that it's a very hot topic. I know the whole bit about unsourced content about living people, but there are plenty of sources repeating the article. Maybe write in "controversy"? I'm willing to write the article, I just want the OK to do so. Pharkryi (talk) 18:32, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As long as you have good sourcing and follow guidelines, I don't see why not. R. A. Simmons Talk 23:30, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think accusations should be given a huge section in his biography. This basically means, anytime a woman (in this case with a history of fake rape claims) accuses someone of rape, it does in his permanent record. Even her bandmate called bullshit. This should be removed. All it takes is one crazy woman to ruin your reputation and to tarnish whatshoukd be an article about his accomplishments. Lemonlimeotter (talk) 16:31, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

lol you sound scared, what skeletons are in your closet — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.154.173 (talk) 16:08, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
”history of fake rape claims” uhhhhhh, [citation needed] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.61.11.105 (talk) 15:01, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to mention it, it doesn't need to take up half of the entry. It's literally taking one accusation and giving it the same amount of time as his entire body of work. I know it's fun to try to destroy everyone's reputation these days, but there is no proof, just heresay. He never admitted to rape, and claims it was a consensual encounter that was never consummated. It's his word against hers. Ask yourself why no mention of this incident is in her Wikipedia page before you insist on defacing his article again. There was never a consensus that this should be added and unsigned comments should not be considered legitimate. Lemonlimeotter (talk) 11:04, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the allegations. These should not be restored without a consensus to do so. Feel free to discuss here or at WP:BLPN-- Deepfriedokra 14:42, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree with the consensus that the accusation is solely defamatory, I do feel as if the incident should at least be referenced. Its absence from the article certainly sticks out, and the notability and significance of the incident I believe warrants at least a reference, although the entire section previously posted by vandals is perhaps too much. Emskidoodlepip (talk) 13:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed it's absence comes off as highly suspicious, like we're trying to launder his image.Gagaluv1 (talk) 02:44, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Michael Gira. 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: 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) 16:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reinstatement of rape allegations[edit]

As anyone can see in the edit history, there's a small edit war going on between sides for and against including the rape allegations. As I see it, there's only one user on the talkpage (Lemonlimeotter) who was opposed. I'd suggest that we try to edit the section so that's it's smaller and contains Gira's viewpoint as well. In the current culture with so many sexual assault allegations, and it being covered so heavily in the media, I think we should include it in biographies, but from a neutral standpoint. Funtaine (talk) 18:18, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the record: I'd prefer to leave it out, or mention it only in passing. This is a BLP; it was an unsubstantiated accusation. There was some coverage in the music press at the time, but there's been no lasting attention to it media since. Yilloslime (talk) 18:46, 25 August 2019 (UTC) Yilloslime (talk) 14:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
As I've explained directly above, and also here: User talk:Yilloslime#Reverted edits to Michael Gira, I really don't think the rape allegation needs to be included at all, but I am not categorically against mentioning it either. This is, however, a WP:BLP and extreme care must taken with type of thing. The text that the IP editor from Melbourne keeps inserting gives the whole thing way too much WP:WEIGHT (putting it in its own section), and the long quote from the accuser borders on being a WP:SOAPBOX. Plus, the sourcing aint great: Billboard and Pitchfork aren't sufficient for this sort of thing. Finally, see WP:RECENT--the allegation was reported in a few music sources at the time, but has had little to no lasting coverage. Ergo, I'm removing the section. Yilloslime (talk) 03:08, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I dealt with a similar example on another article some months back, and I was pointed towards WP:BLPCRIME which deals with adding information with regards to "well known" individuals. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 15:07, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Allegation dispute[edit]

This issue has been brought up multiple times, I am not the only one concerned about this glaring omission. These allegations are sourced, can be written in a way that gives credence to both sides. It even gets mentioned in reviews of their later music, so it does impact their image. The fact that there is not even a sentence about this simply reads as at best a forgetful error or at worst as censorship. Not to mention the comments on this page that hold the (demonstrably false) claim that women making false rape claims for their advantage is a pervasive problem. Gagaluv1 (talk) 22:42, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think it should be included. It's undue; not a notable story. It got weak coverage and disappeared. Zanahary (talk) 08:48, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From my view, based on the nature of the content and the available sources, BLP policy appears to favor exclusion at this time. The introduction to the policy includes, "it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment." These allegations were reported on in 2016, and are allegations of criminal conduct; according to WP:BLPCRIME, "A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction," and Gira does not appear to be a public figure as described by the policy, so we should seriously consider not including the allegations. I think exclusion is further supported by the relatively limited amount of coverage that appears to be available. Beccaynr (talk) 23:27, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gira is absolutely a public figure. I genuinely don’t understand how you could think otherwise. Review WP:LPI, Gira has given countless interviews and thousands of public performances, he is the very definition of a public figure. BLPcrime says “If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—“ documented in Billboard, MTV, The Guardian, amongst others, I don’t see that as “relatively limited coverage”. The exclusion of this is baffling. RF23 (talk) 08:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also I’ve seen editors revert the additions claiming there was a consensus to remove them, this did not happen. Also multiple arguments made above are incorrect or contradictory (one claims there is no lasting coverage as a reason for exclusion; another user points out the accusations have had lasting effects being brought up in reviews of his music made since). A RFC should probably be put in to establish actual consensus among trusted editors. RF23 (talk) 08:25, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
According to WP:BLPUNDEL, To ensure that material about living people is written neutrally to a high standard, and based on high-quality reliable sources, the burden of proof is on those who wish to retain, restore, or undelete the disputed material. When material about living persons has been deleted on good-faith BLP objections, any editor wishing to add, restore, or undelete it must ensure it complies with Wikipedia's content policies. If it is to be restored without significant change, consensus must be obtained first. I also think it would be helpful to link to sources in discussion that may support inclusion, (e.g. about WP:PUBLICFIGURE vs. WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE, and whether sufficient sourcing exists according to WP:BLPCRIME according to either standard) before an RfC. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 16:46, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you said "Gira does not appear to be a public figure as described by the policy, so we should seriously consider not including the allegation" can you explain which part of the policy supports him not being considered a public figure? RF23 (talk) 13:09, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think the WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE section of BLP policy helps explain how notability is not sufficient to establish a WP:PUBLICFIGURE, which seems to be a higher threshold than the apparent prominence of this musician/record label founder/author. The WP:LPI essay seems helpful when considered holistically for interpreting WP:BLP1E's reference to a 'low-profile individual', but this designation seems distinct from what appears to be a higher standard set for a public figure in BLP policy. I think specifically identifying sources in this discussion will help resolve whether this subject is public or nonpublic, and whether allegations can be included neutrally based on high-quality reliable sources. Beccaynr (talk) 17:42, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still not understanding your stance. The wiki article for public figure states "A public figure is a person who has achieved fame, prominence or notoriety within a society, whether through achievement, luck, action, or in some cases through no purposeful action of their own.", a definition I believe Gira definitely fits. Do you disagree with that? You state that "I think the WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE section of BLP policy helps explain how notability is not sufficient to establish a WP:PUBLICFIGURE" however the page does not define this at all, can you please explain? It states "Many Wikipedia articles contain material on people who are not well known, regardless of whether they are notable enough for their own article." yet does not define "well known", however links to WP:LPI, which clearly lays out definitions. RF23 (talk) 18:57, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I still think this should be left out of the article. The sourcing was never great--as best I can recall it was only mentioned in music-related press like Pitchfork--and for a BLP we need solid sourcing for something as negative as this. Had charges been filed or had a lawsuit been brought, or had there been other accusers, then I'd be more inclined to include it. But as I recall, basically Grimm made a Facebook post alleging she'd be raped several years prior, Pitchfork and some other entertainment media covered it, Gira denied it, and that was it. No lasting coverage, no legal action or other repercussions, no additional accusations. Does not rise to level of inclusion in a BLP.Yilloslime (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ultimately, my view similarly depends on sourcing that can be specifically identified. For example, are there sources indicating Gira has a position of "pervasive power and influence" or "widespread fame"? (See PBS discussion of public figures). And as noted in a previous discussion at this talk page, this could be further discussed here, or at the Biographies of living persons noticeboard. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 19:50, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
[I'm gonna format this in chunks for readability and ease of response, signing the end of each paragraph. Let me know if there's an easier way to format this.]
-How is it "only being mentioned in music-related press" relevant? The below mentioned sources are all reliable sources as laid out in Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources (While this is not an album, the project page states "The following list consists of recommended sources for expanding articles that primarily or exclusively cover musical topics.") (Additionally several of the sources below are non-music sources). Is there some policy I'm not aware of that points to Pitchfork, MTV, Billboard or any other music-related websites not being usable in articles? Is there a policy that states that allegations must have "lasting coverage, legal action/other repercussions or additional accusations" to be included? I'm not sure how that's relevant, this was widely reported at the time, in the Guardian, pitchfork, sterogum, vice, exclaim! among others - all of those are considered reliable third party sources by Wikipedia standards. RF23 (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Generally applicable policies include WP:BLP policy, e.g. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP.... There is also WP:NOT policy, including WP:NOTNEWS, e.g. Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events and WP:NOTSCANDAL, e.g. Articles and content about living people are required to meet an especially high standard, as they may otherwise be libellous or infringe the subjects' right to privacy. From my view, these policies speak to underlying principles related to developing contentious content in a biography of a living person that involves another living person. As to the initial batch of sources listed above, based on the dates of publication, these appear to be similar "breaking news" coverage:
Beccaynr (talk) 18:48, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
-RE: No repercussions: the Sydney Morning Herald, NME, MusicFeeds, themusic.com, diffuser.fm, Pitchfork, all reported on Gira cancelling his tour after the allegations, so there were repercussions. RF23 (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Swans' Michael Gira Cancels Australian Tour (Pitchfork, 29 Feb 2016) "Swans frontman Michael Gira has canceled the Australian leg of his solo tour, set to take place later this week and next. No reason has been given for the cancelation. All of Gira's other upcoming shows are scheduled to go on as planned." The source has a list of tour dates, showing the Australian leg was three shows, and summarizes the allegations from the previous week as well as Gira's responses in 2 sentences.
  • Swans’ Michael Gira cancels Australian solo tour amid accusations (NME, 1 Mar 2016) - this source refers to Pitchfork and Guardian coverage, includes more about Grimm, and significant quotes from Grimm and Gira (through his publicist).
  • Sydney Morning Herald (1 Mar 2016) "Influential American avant-garde musician Michael Gira has cancelled his Australian tour following allegations..."
  • The Music 29 February 2016 - offers further context about the allegations, Grimm and another living person
  • Diffuser 29 Feb 2016 - a brief post about the three cancelled Australian tour dates, "No reason was given for the cancelation, but last week, Gira was accused..." and a brief summary.
Beccaynr (talk) 19:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
-I disagree with your claim of "no lasting coverage", Gira himself discusses the allegations later that year, later that year MTV released an article about the accusations, they are mentioned in pitchfork's review of a 2019 Swans album and in a 2019 article about the greatest industrial albums of all times on how they impact Swans's legacy, there's even a published collegiate thesis from 2017 dissecting the social media discourse of the allegations.RF23 (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In a July 2016 interview with Observer, Gira on ‘Dangling Off the Edge of a Cliff’ for Swans’ Epic Final Album, the allegations are discussed, and Gira's comments include "Unfortunately, in today’s media environment, I’m presumed guilty by many people and anything I say is a clue to my supposed guilt or is interpreted as an attack on some victim, which she is decidedly not." The Observer links to a March 2016 opinion piece Why Men Should Address Music’s Rape Culture Problem Right Now, discussing Grimm's allegations as an example of where "progressive dialogue isn’t happening" and discusses consent as applied to the allegations. As to the sources in the comment above:
  • Michael Gira of Swans Talks Rebooting, Larkin Grimm (CLRVYNT, Sept 2016) - most of the interview is about Gira and his music, with two questions about Grimm - Gira provides a two-graf reply to the first, denying the allegations, and a two-sentence reply to the second, about what might happen if there are criminal charges.
  • How Do You Solve A Problem Like Swans? (MTV, Oct 2016) this source includes:

    In February, Grimm posted an account on Facebook of an incident she said occurred in 2008, when she was signed to Gira’s Young God label. The post (which has since been deleted in the wake of the online abuse that Grimm endured after sharing it) ... [...] Grimm’s story did spread, but its reception has been ambivalent. No dates were canceled after Swans’ tour was announced in April, according to the band’s representative and their booking agent. The Glowing Man’s promotional cycle rolled out on schedule, seemingly without a hitch. [...] ... Where they differ most clearly is on consent — whether Grimm gave consent, or whether she was even capable of doing so. This ambiguity, coupled with a lack of legal proceedings, has resulted in a quiet response from both the band’s followers and the music industry at large. No columns urged readers to boycott Swans’ discography, and Gira has done plenty of interviews supporting the band’s new album.

  • Leaving Meaning (Pitchfork, 2019) - an album review that in parentheses states the allegations "denied by him, but never retracted by his accuser—will forever draw an uncomfortable shadow beneath Gira’s portraits of repentant sinners."
  • The 33 Best Industrial Albums of All Time (Pitchfork, June 2019) - at the end of the entry for Swans: Greed/Holy Money (1986) - stating the allegations "later in his career—disappointing for an artist so fixated themes of domination and submission in his songs—now complicate Swans’ legacy, offering a darker coda still"
  • the last source listed is a Masters thesis, and per the WP:SCHOLARSHIP guideline, Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence.
Beccaynr (talk) 05:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
-The fact that Gira admitted to the encounter, yet claimed it was consensual (which in a follow up interview provided to Billboard, Grimm claimed is an admission of guilt, similar to the Kobe Bryant defense) is notable as well. Also of note is one of Grimm's former band mate's challenging her claims against another musician, I'm not sure if this should be included as it's not specifically talking about the claims against Gira, they are only briefly mentioned in passing. This isn't something like the seemingly unfounded accusations against Trent Reznor from a few years back that were not reported on by any reliable sources [just as a counter example for something that wouldn't warrant inclusion on Wiki based on lack of sourcing].RF23 (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The first source is from the Guardian, 27 Feb 2016, and includes a quote from his wife's Facebook post; the next source has Grimm's statement in Billboard, 28 Feb 2016, with some context. Then there is the former bandmate statement published in Spin on 4 March 2016, seeming to do a bit more than 'challenge her claims', along with a similar allegation about Grimm in a quote from Gira's wife. Beccaynr (talk) 05:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
-re: Beccaynr, as far as I'm aware PBS's definitions are not Wikipedia policy. It seems to me that there isn't any definition besides the WP:LPI essay, unless I'm missing something. See the Musical Style and legacy section of Gira's band Swans (of whom is the defacto leader and only constant member of) for some examples of his pervasive power and influence and widespread fame. Notably, Kurt Cobain was influenced by Gira and Cobain is regarded as one of the "most influential rock musicians in the history of alternative music" (wiki's sourced wording). Guitar world mentions "There's no denying that Swans' music is impactful – the band have been cited as a major influence by a wide range of alt-guitar greats, among them Nirvana, Tool, Melvins, Napalm Death and Godflesh, and albums such as 1987's Children of God and 1996's Soundtracks for the Blind remain bona fide classics in noise rock circles. RF23 (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The text of the WP:PUBLICFIGURE section includes:

In the case of public figures, there will be a multitude of reliable published sources, and BLPs should simply document what these sources say. If an allegation or incident is noteworthy, relevant, and well documented, it belongs in the article—even if it is negative and the subject dislikes all mention of it. If you cannot find multiple reliable third-party sources documenting the allegation or incident, leave it out.

The public figure article linked in the text also includes "A fairly high threshold of public activity is necessary to elevate people to a public figure status", and the PBS source I linked to above is included as a source for text below this statement. The WP:LPI essay defines itself as an explanatory essay related to WP:BLP1E, and mentions nonpublic figures in its lead; however, someone's efforts to promote themselves does not seem to necessarily translate into successfully becoming well-known according to WP:BLPCRIME.

One way I considered the public figure issue here is by reviewing Michael Gira's article generally - the sources and text do not seem to indicate he is well-known and/or prominent; similarly, the initial coverage of the allegations, based mostly in music-related press also seems to show his lack of prominence - had his status been otherwise, coverage of the allegations would presumably reflect this by being more widespread and extensive.

Instead, what appears available is an initial burst of similar coverage dating from late February to early March 2016, mostly in music-related press, followed by July and September 2016 interviews of Gira with self-serving statements denying the allegations, an October 2016 piece in MTV that seems to reflect on the minimal impact of the allegations (besides online abuse directed at Grimm), and two 2019 Pitchfork sources briefly mentioning the allegations (which likely should be considered as one source). I think even with consensus that Gira is a public figure for WP:BLPCRIME, there does not seem to be particularly strong sourcing for inclusion.

I also think it is problematic from a BLP policy standpoint that there are allegations leveled at Grimm in the reporting, and development of this contentious content could lead to inclusion, at minimum via the sources, of sensationalized, tabloid-style contentious claims about her as well.

As to the Musical style and legacy section mentioned above for "examples of his pervasive power and influence and widespread fame," I reviewed the sources in the "cited as an influence by a variety of rock and extreme metal musicians" part of that section:

Swans musical style and legacy source review
  • Napalm Death - an interview in the AskEarache blog
  • Godflesh - a 2014 interview in Vice with a passing mention of the Swans ("Within a matter of months, I’d joined Napalm Death and sort of usurped Fall Of Because by presenting them with a bunch of hardcore records, like Discharge, and things like Swans and Sonic Youth. It all snowballed from there.")
  • Melvins - a 2002 interview on markprindle.com - ("at the time, we were listening to a lot of Swans, Gang of Four's "Solid Gold" album which has remained a favorite, umm.Public Image Limited's "Flowers of Romance" - that was another big positive influence for us. Uhh. Meat Puppets II. Not as much Sabbath as people would imagine at that point; we were actually much more into Black Flag than Black Sabbath at that period in time. [...] We were really into Venom and Flipper and the Swans. Stuff like that. And some Sabbath too, I guess. Though I think I was listening to the Dio stuff at that time. Probably Heaven and Hell more than any of them.")
  • Neurosis - a mention in the intro to a Nov 2016 Guardian music blog interview ("The band acknowledge influences from Swans and Skullflower to Hawkwind and Townes Van Zandt, but it’s the UK anarcho-punk scene of the early 80s that perhaps runs deepest through their collective taste.")
  • Treponem Pal - a 2008 interview on leseternals.net, which appears to be a blog, mentioning (in French), "nous avons joué avec les Swans à l'Élysée-Montmartre à l'époque, c'est un groupe qui nous a influencés énormément."
  • Nirvana - the source cited in your comment above Kurt Cobain’s 50 favourite albums in Kerrang!, published April 1, 2020 and based on a list previously written by Cobain titled "Top 50 by Nirvana" - the Swans EP is listed as #50, with one sentence of analysis as to how the author believes the "confrontational spirit" of the album informed Cobain's work
  • Tool - a brief quote from Tom Morello published in Consequence in October 2016 "(“I remember he played for me a Swans album, which was way outside my comfort zone,” Morello recalls)"
  • My Dying Bride - a Release Magazine magazine interview, "I listen to, and get inspiration from, bands like Dead Can Dance, Swans and Nick Cave."
  • Isis - a 2020 interview in peek-a-boo-magazine.be, "He and I both were really into things like Swans and Godflesh and Neurosis."
  • the maelstromzine interview sources are not accessible; cosmiclava returns a 404; spinner.com is not accessible
  • Car Seat Headrest - a 2015 interview on the What the Sound website - this source actually mentions Gira - "Michael Gira is one that I’d definitely be happy to be compared to because he writes great music and has a good work ethic about it too, which I admire." and "...and I saw Swans last summer, and that was really an amazing experience. So all of that really drove it home to me that there’s a lot that you can do live that you can’t do on an album, so that’s what I spent the past year exploring- really."

There is also the 2023 intro to the GuitarWorld interview with Gira, noted in your comment above, which may be a bit circular based on the text of the Wikipedia article that says "influence" without reliable sources that seem to strongly support "cited as a major influence." GuitarWorld also mentions two albums that "remain bona fide classics in noise rock circles." Noise rock, at least according to the Wikipedia article, is a genre outside the mainstream, and perhaps the GuitarWorld mention of the albums remaining popular there is an indication of the relative prominence of Gira as a musician.

Overall, I think there should be better sourcing available, that does not require combing through niche music publications, blogs, and interviews, to demonstrate someone is a public figure. Having done so over the past few days, I feel as if the offered sourcing helps emphasize how despite the efforts to promote himself in what appears to be a niche music community, Gira has not become well-known or prominent in society. Beccaynr (talk) 20:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BLPCRIME does not mention anything about promotion, can you clarify that last sentence?RF23 (talk) 21:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The WP:LPI essay discusses self-promotion as an aspect of considering whether someone is a low-profile individual for the purposes of WP:BLP1E. WP:BLPCRIME appears focused on whether someone is well-known, i.e. whether the self-promotion succeeded in making the person well-known and not covered by WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE (e.g. Many Wikipedia articles contain material on people who are not well known, regardless of whether they are notable enough for their own article.) Beccaynr (talk) 21:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
you had stated "someone's efforts to promote themselves does not seem to necessarily translate into successfully becoming well-known according to WP:BLPCRIME." I was asking for clarification on that as WP:BLPCRIME does not mention anything regarding anyone's efforts to promote themselves, I do not understand the correlation in your statement.RF23 (talk) 22:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding of your view on how to designate someone as a WP:PUBLICFIGURE is reliance on the WP:LPI essay, which discusses self-promotion as one aspect of determining whether someone is a low-profile individual for a different application of BLP policy; some of your comments here also discuss Gira's efforts at self-promotion as an indication of public figure status. I have suggested a plain reading of BLP policy, including WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE, seems to indicate self-promotion is not the equivalent of being "well known."
Just because someone promotes themselves (LPI essay) does not mean they actually succeed in becoming well-known and prominent in society (PUBLICFIGURE policy), and with Gira, it seems he has focused on promoting himself to a limited and niche audience. This is related to a review of sources and how Gira does not appear to have become well-known (in addition to his notability) based on the sources produced in this discussion. Beccaynr (talk) 23:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with your assessment, as I have stated my reasons above and below. I still have yet to see a link to a Wikipedia policy definition of what a public figure is, as WP:PUBLICFIGURE just links to the wiki article of public figure, which states "A public figure is a person who has achieved fame, prominence or notoriety within a society, whether through achievement, luck, action, or in some cases through no purposeful action of their own", a definition I believe Gira fits. I do think the sourcing on the Gira article itself is poor, but that should not factor on determining if he's a public figure or not.RF23 (talk) 21:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
-Regarding the WP:LPI (which seems to be the only literature on WP that discusses what is an isn't a public figure) essay, Gira is a public figure under the following criteria: "Media attention - High-profile: Has given one or more scheduled interviews to a notable publication, website, podcast, or television or radio program" a google search via the news tabs of "Michael Gira Interview" results in 72 results". Promotional activities: "High-profile: Has voluntarily participated in self-publicity activities, such as press conferences, promotional appearances, book signings, and the like; and/or has participated in an attention-seeking manner in publicity for some other concern, such as a cause, election campaign or commercial endorsee." See direct above, Gira has done many interviews promoting his music. Appearances and performances - "High-profile: Has appeared as a featured performer or speaker for a publicly advertised event at which admission was collected and/or which garnered significant independent, non-local coverage. May have produced publications (books, DVDs, etc.) or events that at least in part are designed (successfully or not) to self-promote and to attract favorable public attention." Gira has performed over 500 concerts with his band alone, let alone solo concerts. Anecdotally I asked a friend that's a former news paper editor if a musician in a high profile band is considered a public figure and he stated absolutely. I do not see ANY Wikipedia policies, essays or anything that would support your position that Gira is NOT a public figure, which is your primary argument against inclusion of the claims against him as you have stated above. RF23 (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I hope I have clarified my views on the sourcing and applicable policies in my comments above. At this point, I think further discussion could continue at the Biographies of living persons noticeboard, to address questions related to a) whether Gira is a public figure according to WP:BLPCRIME, and if so, does available sourcing support inclusion of the allegations; b) if Gira is not a public figure according to WP:BLPCRIME, does available sourcing support inclusion of the allegations; and c) do other BLP policy considerations support exclusion of the contentious content, i.e. for the other living person involved in the alleged incident and related coverage. Beccaynr (talk) 20:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. I have asked editors at the Music Wikiproject for additional input at this time. RF23 (talk) 21:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Gira&oldid=1202298895"