Talk:Piero Scaruffi

message: "It looks like my Wikipedia bio was vandalized by a combination of jealous "scholars" (who scientifically removed all references to my works and books) and... by Beatles fans! Hard to believe, but basically you can't have a Wikipedia bio if you don't like the Beatles, because Beatles fans will start vandalizing your bio until you request that your bio be deleted (which is what i just did). I am now realizing that a Wikipedia page (on any subject) is in the hands of the people who have more determination and more time, not in the hands of the most competent ones. I have neither the time nor the inclination, so i would always lose. Therefore i asked Wikipedia to delete my bio.
Jakub Krawczynski sent me this comment:
I find it quite amusing that almost all of the Beatles songs have their own entries on wikipedia (nothing wrong with that in itself, actually), even if they are not singles, and each of them is meticulously dissected as if there were transcendental suites exceeding human comprehension, yet bands like Faust or Red Krayola, etc. have biographies even shorter than just one article about any random Beatles song. Needless to say, none of their songs have any articles on them, yet I'm sure there would be a lot more to talk about. Moreover, if you had put any bad review of their album on the site with the intention to show the broader scope of opinions, you'd risk your "life" there, since such fanatics don't accept any single sign of trying to be objective (maybe wrong word). Beatles fans will always defend their beloved band as if their lives would depend on it, there are too many examples to even begin with, and you are seen as public enemy number 1 to them. It's like your article is one giant cognitive dissonance to them and vandalizing your bio was the only way to reduce this dissonance."
This was from Scaruffi's website: http://www.scaruffi.com/music/novus.html Also, I never claimed that I was Scaruffi. Stop directing comments toward me. WestArcherLives (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm assuming that you are Piero Scaruffi; I have no beef with you personally, nor with many of your opinions on popular music, which on many occasions are more cogently argued than those of, say Robert Christgau. However, the culture here is to rely upon reliable sources, and in this case, this tends to drift towards Allmusic and Rolling Stone, or whatever is regarded as the "expert" for a particular genre of music. Even when your reviews have been contrary to the "received wisdom" on a particular band, or song, I have argued for their inclusion on the basis that we should present our readers with multiple assessments, but ultimately leave it to them to make up their own minds. Your problem is that you are regarded as a self-published source in this regard, and therefore not susceptible to some sort of editorial control- personally, I think that a well-argued critique, from whatever source, is better than a mind-jerk rejection. I don't think references to religion are helpful; it's clear to me that having read many of your reviews cited here, over many months, they do not display a particular proselytism. However, the major criticisms of your work remain: that they are self-published original research, and as far as mainstream music criticism is, you are not necessarily accepted into that mainstream. Sorry, but I can do nothing about any of those issues. Rodhullandemu 00:16, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are missing the point. Music criticism isn't exactly a personal opinion. A good critic may not enjoy hearing Sex Pistols for example, but he can't deny their importance and influence. If wikipedia were to place opinions in album articles, then we would include editor's own opnions on albums instead of professional reviews. Now this whole text about his opnion on his wikipedia article is completely useless and irrelevant, because he is not to decide if he should have his article on the site or not, users are entitled to that task. And saying that wikipedia editors  are "Beatles fans who scientifically removed all references to my works and books" is just ridiculous. Now, I don't mind about him having a wikipedia article or not, but I think it's absurd include his reviews in wikipedia's albums articles because he is NOT a notable nor a professional reviewer. He isn't listened in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:ALBUM/REVSIT, therefore I wonder why his reviews are still appearing in some albums. Also, nothing against him and his opnion, but this his article is in fact useless and poorly written and I think we should for once agree with "his request" and delete it. Illuminatuz (talk) 21:23, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Scaruffi's Response

message: I would like to add the following information to the article on Piero Scaruffi:
"This article is full of mistakes and defamatory. Whenever we try to correct it, Wikipedia restores the mistakes (so it is pointless to correct them) and our IP addresses get banned forever from Wikipedia. Help keep this sentence on this page but be aware that Wikipedia will almost certainly ban your IP address forever. Do not simply correct the mistakes because within 24 hours Wikipedia will restore the version with the mistakes. Piero has sued Wikipedia and asked them to simply erase the entire page, but Wikipedia has refused to do so". 
Source:
http://www.scaruffi.com/helpwiki.html
Lesbianfish (talk) 22:20, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Umm, I don't know how to say this impartially, but this seems biased. You might find this good reading if you are the subject himself. A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 14:45, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request on 26 September 2012 

message: I've added scaruffi.com to the Wikipedia:Spam blacklist requests due to editor complaints that his site is still being used as a reference source on various articles. Please provide your comments there and remember COI. MediaWiki_talk:Spam-blacklist#scaruffi.com AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:28, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam blacklist 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Piero Scaruffi. 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/20140202224850/http://www.tower.com/book-publisher/omniware to http://www.tower.com/book-publisher/omniware
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:16, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The source for this claim leads to a completely unrelated obituary. Not only is this an act of vandalism, but it is in extremely poor taste towards Piero Scaruffi and the unrelated person in the obituary. I realize that a small edit war has been happening about this, but I just wanted to confirm that this claim is in fact completely without merit.
Do You Like Veggies (talk) 20:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, and it's been removed from the article, and the article has been temporarily protected to prevent further vandalism. [stwalkerster|talk] 21:30, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  About Piero Scaruffi's "Death" 

message: Omnipublishing does not exist, most of his books are NOT published by Omniware (in interviews he stated that Omniware was simply a way to print drafts of the books that have been later published elsewhere), not sure why it's important to quote him on how many copies a book sold in 2006 (???), he was the founding director of the A.I. Center at Olivetti (not just "worked on"), 
eg https://www.parc.com/blog/great-awakening-or-hype-the-year-2017-in-ai/
he is the founder of the Leonardo Art Science Evenings (LASERS), not just "run" a couple of them:
eg https://news.ucsc.edu/2013/09/leonardo-art-science.html
eg http://www.ucira.ucsb.edu/leonardo-art-science-evening-rendezvous/
eg https://direct.mit.edu/leon/article-abstract/53/4/474/96931/The-Network?redirectedFrom=PDF
and they now take place at many universities worldwide https://leonardo.info/laser-hosts (which seems more relevant than how many copies a book sold in 2006),
and his website is definitely not just about "music, film, and art" (you may or may not like them but it has thousands of pages on tech, science, history, ... ).
I have no way to verify this, but scaruffi.com was also listed here as one of the oldest websites:
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/0/worlds-oldest-websites-still-around-today/piero-scaruffi/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.51.123.147 (talk) 08:01, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just some notes for someone else to introduce in the article 

message: Can someone with the necessary authorizations, delete this non  encyclopedic article?
Wikipedia:Notability (people)
Thanks.
--SamInside (talk) 14:59, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Deletion request belong to WP:AFD. Follow the instructions listed there. (CC) Tbhotch™ 19:46, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting the page