Talk:Zakhar Bron

Latest comment: 6 years ago by DJRafe in topic Previous version

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Zakhar Bron. 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) 18:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Previous version edit

The earlier text was essentially libelous and defamatory regarding Bron and competitions, because it presents one man's opinions (Luisi's) as if it were fact. The citations of Lebrecht in support weaken the accusations further, because Lebrecht is by far the most notorious gossip in classical music, who consistently posts gossip and factual mistakes on his blog. Schmid's article stated that, in fact, not all of the prize laureates were Bron students, bur rather all but one (which I will acknowledge is still a rather high quotient). I have no particular respect for Bron, and I do respect Fabio Luisi. But respect is not the same as hard, verifiable, well-documented facts that can stand up in a court of law. Gossip and one man's opinion do not qualify in either respect. No other sources have made these accusations. And it is no defence to say that Lebrecht is widely read. Donald Trump has millions of followers on Twitter, and every word that Trump says is false, including 'a', 'an', and 'the'. Being widely read is not the same as being factually accurate. If anyone does not understand these basic principles, that person should not be editing on wikipedia. DJRafe (talk) 22:05, 6 May 2018 (UTC)Reply