Talk:James Marcus Bach

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Notability

I don't see how this could fail the notability guideline:

James Bach is regarded as an important figure in software testing.
He is widely cited by his peers.
He is the author of two books. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanielLemire (talk • contribs) 03:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
He is credited (by wikipedia) for Session-based testing.

As for lack of third-party sources... There are at least 5 verifiable third-party references.

Daniel Lemire (talk) 03:05, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. My vote is keep. --User:DiscipleOfKnowledge (talk) 10:34, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

reverse copyvio?

This article was proposed for deletion because of a proposed copyvio, see this. However, that source is dated after the article. Needs a little more checking.--SPhilbrick T 13:55, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am positive that they paraphrased the Wikipedia entry. Daniel Lemire (talk) 14:41, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because current article referred appeared later than current wikipedia page. Also article in question is free-to-read and current information isn't first time published there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.196.253.25 (talk) 11:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lifeboat

Do we have sources (except Lifeboat) that he is an advisor there? I think that is necessary, as now we use only a (quite unreliable in view of all the people that were added without their consent) source from the 'boat itself. L.tak (talk) 09:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's not contentious. His name and image are used on their site, so he clearly knows about it. WP:PRIMARY allows for this sort of reference as does WP:V. Since it's been here since 2010-12-24, I'm sure he's seen it and hasn't tried to remove it.

Neither his blog and company site (satisfice.com) discuss Lifeboat. http://emereo.net/success/james-bach/ does as do a few other biography pages, none of which are RSes. Shall I email him and ask him to comment directly?

Do you have a source that indicates that others have been added to their website without their consent? Walter Görlitz (talk) 09:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think that emailing him would indeed be best. If he is one of their members and has accepted the invitation, then I have no problem keeping it. I have looked around, and couldn't find the discussion regarding people placed without their consent anymore (this was around at the first deletion discussion of Lifeboat Foundation. There is only some strong discussion regarding the site only being a "mailing list" and hidden goals, but I guess that is to be expected when discussing this kind of subjects... L.tak (talk) 09:50, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He responded quite quickly. In reference to the section on Lifeboat he wrote to me:

Technically I am an advisor to Lifeboat, but I started ignoring their forums because they are a bunch of dysfunctional people who really aren't serious about accomplishing anything. I haven't had dealings with them for years. Lifeboat doesn't "credit me" with developing the GFSTP, Microsoft does.

I replied and suggested that he could add sourced material to the article himself and that would not violate WP:COI. His email address is on his website and you could confirm this conversation with him. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:54, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on James Marcus Bach. 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/20120124164328/http://www.pcworld.com/article/98964/did_microsoft_foes_craft_antitrust_penalties.html to http://www.pcworld.com/article/98964/did_microsoft_foes_craft_antitrust_penalties.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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) 02:45, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

India Education Program course assignment

This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.

The above message was substituted from {{IEP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 20:18, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]