Talk:Michael Thomas Ford/Archive 1

Archive 1

This article is too autobiographical, but presented as biography.

This article is too autobiographical, but presented as biography. I have read Mr. Ford's work, and it is very much like what I have read. This is a self aggrandizing bit of tripe. It is not something written about the subject matter; it is a pathetic excuse, written either by the author himself, or, directed by a party close to this person.

Should Mr. Ford wish for recognition, then, it is in the best interest of all to call it what it is, and offer true context. I am a reader, and can see what lack of contribution from an outside source.

I highly suggest that this article be reframed.

That is my opinion, and weighing in on the subject matter. However, should other readers find comfort in the information given, then allow them to hold on to this misinterpretation. Allow this to let an idyll stand; "Truth suffers from too much analysis". Mtbruin (talk) 10:56, 21 February 2014 (UTC) S. G. Hackney

This section not written by author above:

This description is highly promotional. I suspect it was written by the author. Also, it is suggested that Wikipedia investigate the name change. 'Michael Bruce Barnard,' it is believed, is his original name. Furthermore, sections demand attribution. This is factual: "The summer of 2002 found Ford embarking on yet another adventure as This Queern Life, a stage production based on his work and penned by him, premiered at the Loring Playhouse in Minneapolis." This is questionable: "An insightful and riotous collection of scenes drawn from his essay collections, the play wowed audiences and is currently being considered for production by numerous regional theaters." it is unethical for Mr. Ford to use WIkipedia as a promotional tool.

Coverage

• Weaver, Madison (October 20, 2016). "Librarians work to make Wikipedia more inclusive with 'Wiki Loves Pride' event". The Bucknellian.

---Another Believer _(Talk) 07:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)