Talk:The Island of Doctor Moron

This article was nominated for deletion on 16 January 2015. The result of the discussion was speedy keep (nomination withdrawn).

Australia: Music Low‑importance

	Australia portal The Island of Doctor Moron is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian music (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Musical Theatre

The Island of Doctor Moron 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

Comments from article creator left at my talk page

== The Island of Doctor Moron ==

Hi Gaff. Thanks you for your attention to my entry on the above. This is my first attempt at entering an article although I am a keen user of Wiki. A few points: 1. Yes there is an apparent COI – I am the creator of the musical. 2. However – I have attempted to provide only factual information – names, dates, places etc. 3. My motivation is simply to provide an archive for future reference by others. 4. I do not need the self-promotion aspect as we have already attracted enormous positive attention from the industry people who count. Our aim has always been to take this show to another level and we are well on the way to achieving this. 5. As to the reviews you mentioned: Unfortunately, I was on a steep learning curve in how I should deal with the media. I was naive in allowing them into our rehearsals; I believed they were there merely to initially look and that reviews would happen at a later date based on actual shows. This was not the case: both reviews were based on early tech rehearsals where we were dealing with some major issues. Neither reviewer saw the actual show in full-scale performance before paying audiences. Most significantly, neither saw the packed houses (we sat 250 people) toward the end of our season when word-of-mouth ‘reviews’ drew audiences in and many back for 2 to 7 viewings of the show. The show underwent significant script and blocking revisions in the period between the visits by those two reviewers and the actual end of season. Unlike other musicals that have had to actually close down for major script revisions (Strictly Ballroom, An Officer and a Gentleman etc), we were able to accommodate refinements during our season. One of the reviews (not the SMH) is by a person who should not receive any credibility from Wiki – he is a self-appointed theatre blogger whose very demeanour caused me serious concern from the moment he attended our theatre. He will attempt to attach himself to this article for self-promotion only. Again, we received very strong unsolicited reviews from people such as Giles Hardy both as a feature article in Time Out Sydney - November and on ABC Radio National (Tony Delroy) and by Alan Jones on 2GB. Overall the press, TV and media coverage was quite extensive and overwhelmingly positive. 6. Our re-opening of the Palace Academy Twin Cinema building is also historically significant. A search of the records will reveal that it was an iconic cinema in Sydney and prior to that, the building was one of the two great theatres in Sydney in the early twentieth century. I renamed the theatre “The New Olympia” in deference to its name in 1919. If I can be of any further assistance, please contact me. Thank you once again for your interest and attention. Chris Dockrill — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Dockrill (talk • contribs) 22:28, 16 January 2015 (UTC) Gaff (talk) 22:58, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment–Thanks for bringing this here Gaff. It is very obvious that Chris Dockrill is not here to build an encyclopedia but only for self promotion. I left a message on their talk page yesterday, where I pointed them to this guideline. If i were to be anything called Chris Dockrill, I won't make any further edit on the article until I follow the instructions on that guideline. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 06:43, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, if you think I'm self-promoting - you're wrong but I don't care. I'll gladly delete the article. I thought I was actually doing a service to the Wiki community. Actually think it's a useful forum. Guess I was wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Dockrill (talk • contribs) 11:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Dockrill If you write about yourself, your group or your company, once the article is created, you have no right to control its content, or to delete it outside the normal channels. Content is irrevocably added with every edit. However, COI is never a crime on wikipedia. There are Wikipedians with articles. You only need to read and understand this guideline. In addition, no editor can get blocked from doing the right thing and if you are bullied by any editor, let me know on my talk page. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 19:52, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chris, don't take it personally. Some people get a bit militant over concerns of conflict of interest. As long as you are not blatantly pushing an agenda, there should not be any fall-out. Editors who are consistently pushing their own point-of-view can end up getting blocked. It looks like the article will be kept, based on how the discussion at the Articles for Deletion page is going. You actually at this point are not able to delete it, since it is more or less property (see the fine print just above the save page button?). Even if your article was deleted, somebody else could just open it up. It didn;t think it was fair that my edit simply said reviews were " negative" so I changed it to mixed. Somebody else will probably expand the article. Hopefully this does not completely turn you off to WP. Gaff (talk) 15:37, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys. ``` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris Dockrill (talk • contribs) 21:23, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! Please always sign talk pages with ~~~~ at the end of your comments. Cheers! Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£}

I just noticed on the edited page that the cast for the original production is listed but not the cast for the actual world premiere in Sydney last year (which is probably the most significant aspect) and details - singers, musicians etc of the CD. Is there a reason for this? Sorry, but as you can see, I am on a learning curve. Hope I've got the signature thing right this time. ~~~~

* Chris, at the risk of bringing down the wrath of the Wiki-Gods, you can either make the edits to the article page yourself, or (safer), paste a draft of them on my sandbox page (User:Gaff/sandbox) and I will post them for you. Just delete the other stuff on my sandbox page. We use these for test edits, etc. As far as the signature goes, leave out the "nowiki" tags, since that kills the computer code function. THen after you save the page, you'll see your signature and time stamp. The other way, if you notice at the top of this edit box, there are buttons for BOLD and Italics. Right next to them is a button that looks like a pencil signing something. That is, you guessed it, a way to sign your comments! Then it will look like this Gaff (talk) 22:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC) and not ~~~~. Get it? Gaff (talk) 22:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]