Talk:Edna May

Edna May is part of WikiProject Musical Theatre, organized to improve and complete musical theatre articles and coverage on Wikipedia. You can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Musical TheatreWikipedia:WikiProject Musical TheatreTemplate:WikiProject Musical TheatreMusical Theatre articles

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

References to Charles L. Pascoe's book

Hello, clp. Thank you for initiating the conversation below. Wikipedia works by consensus, and a talk page discussion is the best way to build a consensus regarding disputed content. It appears that you are C. Pascoe, the writer of the self-published book Edna May – Superstar... and the owner of the website that you wish to link to, so please read WP:COI and WP:ADV to learn about what to do if you have a conflict of interest with respect to information that you wish to add to an article. Subject to our guideline on Self-Published Sources it is possible that this article can mention facts from your book. For us to be able to cite your book, you need to give us facts here that show that you are "an established expert on the topic of the article, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." If you can do that, then we can mention facts from your book and cite it together with the page number(s) on which such facts are located. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External link; COI

I had previously added an external link to www.ednamay.net under the Edna May biography. It was there since 2009. As of this week, there have been wiki member(s) that are removing this link and declaring it as spam or self-promoting. I hereby state my case that this is not so. It is an external link to the most informative and resource rich web site on Edna May on the internet, which just so happens to have a link to a book to be purchased. The web site came first. The link to the buying of the book came second. Thank you. Clp69 (talk) 23:59, 14 February 2013 (UTC)clp69[reply]

Here is the External Link under discussion. The home page is all about your book. Wikipedia is not a place for advertising books (see #5), and we certainly cannot link to the homepage. I reviewed the website to see whether any other part of it provides a unique resource that would be appropriate as a WP:EL in this article. It is certainly not helpful that the website's "About this website" page states "here is a web site I slapped together" and offers no information that would explain why we can use this Self-Published Source. Assuming that we *could* use the website under the WP:SPS guideline, this is what I saw: 1) the Biography page is just a fact sheet (I notice that we already cite this in the article); 2) the Gallery again advertises the book with a prominent blinking sign - if it did not, then I suppose we could link to the Gallery page; 3) the Clippings page gives links to clippings: instead of linking to this page, what we need to do is read the clippings, and use the information in them to improve the Wikipedia article, and then cite directly to the source, rather than to the website; 4) the Miscellaneous page: ditto; and 5) the links page: if any of the links are particularly useful in this article, we could link directly to them. So, I do not believe that there is anything in this website that is an appropriate External Link for this article. Again, please review WP:COI carefully, as it explains how you can proceed here. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:35, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ssilvers. It is with regret that I read your comments placed above. There are many external links added that violate Wikipedia's rules, including some that are still on the Edna May page. I also take as Ad Hominum when you quote my web site ("here is a web site I slapped together"). I feel that this is almost a way to discredit me and to mock my work. My web site was built out of creativity and a sincere interest in Edna May. And I chose to share it with the internet community. The book came second and again , I was proud of my accomplishment. It happens to have found a home in many respected libraries around the world (including The London Library, Westminster Library, New York Public Library). I hope that counts towards being considered an "established expert". I find it hard to comprehend how one editor can have so much power over someone who is trying to contribute to the Wiki community. Maybe it's best to remove all links pertaining to my work from the Edna May biography and I will stop contributing to Wikipedia. Thank you. --- Clp69 (talk) 21:57, 15 February 2013 (UTC)clp69[reply]

Please don't take Ssilvers' remarks as an ad hominem attack. I have collaborated with him on countless WP articles, and I know that he doesn't go in for personal attacks, any more than I do. Wikipedia is often criticised in the press for all sorts of reasons, among which is personal pushing of a point of view. That is why Wikipedia tries to ensure that all sources are reliable, and that there is no bias. I am no expert on this, but I agree with you that if major libraries have bought your book it suggests that they regard it as a reliable source.

Ssilvers has no more power over anything than any other Wikipedia editor, but he, and I, will seek to apply WP's standards whenever we run across things that seem dubious. I hope you will see why we are, from your point of view, being pernickerty, but it really is for genuine reasons. I hope, above all, that you won't be put off contributing to Wikipedia. We need all the well-informed editors we can get. It's just that the rules are there for a reason, and we all have to follow them. Best wishes. Tim riley (talk) 20:54, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Edna May. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110720080617/http://www.edna-may.com/ to http://www.edna-may.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:11, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]