Jump to content

Talk:Ed Cash

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Auto-biography?

[edit]

The creator of the article claims the image in the infobox is his own work and that he is the image's copyright-holder, a claim confirmed by OTRS. That same image appears on the front page of the subject's website. If the editor is in a position to license the use of an image from the subject's website -- and, indeed, is the image's creator and copyright-holder -- then the creator and principal editor of the article is either the subject himself or a close associate. Either way, he should not have created the article himself and should not be editing it. -- Rrburke (talk) 23:11, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To my knowledge, there's no policy that an article should not be created by the subject of the article. The only policy is that articles must use reliable, verifiable sources and that it be neutral. That is essentially what Wikipedia:Autobiography states.
The original author is not the only author, others have edited it as well, which means that it is approved by other editors in the community.
Unless you have a specific objection to the article as it stands, I don't think the article should be tagged with the autobiography template. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Autobiographies are strongly discouraged, as is any other conflict-of-interest editing. Subjects of articles and other editors with conflicts of interest should restrict their editing of articles involving their conflict to those set out at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Non-controversial edits. Using Wikipedia as a vehicle for promotion is wholly incompatible with the core goal of producing unbiased, high-quality encyclopedia articles, and writing extensively about yourself or your close associates are activities hard to distinguish from promotion. Indeed, the creation of autobiographies is, in my opinion, an inherently promotional activity because it serves to enhance the public profile and notoriety of its subject.
The article in its present form appears more like a list of achievements rather than an encyclopedia article, as it appears to include an indiscriminate list of every recording with which the subject has been connected. That an editor with an apparent conflict of interest has included such a list and added to it another which appears to detail every award the subject has received, and that these two lists together account for nearly 90% of the content of the article by word-count, is highly irregular to say the least. Vaunting one's achievements is not an encyclopedic purpose.
Editing by other editors unaware of a conflict of interest decidedly does not imply those editors' endorsement of conflict-of-interest edits. An editor with a conflict of interest should declare that interest openly and then seek the prior approval of other editors before making any substantial mainspace edits to articles involving their conflict. The essay Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest provides a useful standard of behaviour for COI editors to emulate, and this declaration of interest offers a model for how an editor can deal forthrightly with a with a conflict of interest. I note that the editor chose not to respond my query and instead created the article even after being made aware of Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline, WP:BESTCOI, and WP:AUTO -- and has continued making substantial edits to the article since then while remaining silent on the issue of conflict of interest.
While "taking a photo of someone" does not imply a conflict, being the creator and copyright-holder of the subject's website photographs strongly implies a close connection. Please let's not be disingenuous. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:09, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think there's any convincing evidence of a conflict of interest here despite the fact that the user isd the purported copyright holder of an image of the individual, but I have just tagged the page with NPOV and unencyclopaedic tags, which seem to apply: the article is excessively focussed on the individuals achievements and appearances, almost to the extent of being purely promotional (but is just about saved from G12 by the lede, I think). The long lists need to be severely reduced to the most significant ones only, and discussed as prose instead of listed. There's also a lot of mixed tenses and other copyedit concerns, so I have marked the article for copyedit concerns as well. I'll try to fix some of these copyedit issues at some point, but I think the rest of the changes should be discussed here first, as there is clearly some controversy. GiftigerWunsch [TALK] 14:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You have still not given any proof for it being an autobiography as it has been vetted by other editors and there is no COI either. I suggest having it reviewed by the BLP group if you are still concerned about it. It is disingenuous to suggest that because someone has close contact with the subject (or the subject himself) that there is an immediate conflict of interest. Perhaps listing the sections that show COI would be appropriate. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ed Cash. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY 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) 23:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Annette Lee

[edit]

Artist is credited under Ed Cash's all music page, but all music has omitted the date. To corroborate the reference, pls look at Ed Cash's credits under the undated works. They are located below the 1988 vintage. Additionally, the artist's own page (which i've referenced) from all music, also listed Ed cash as the executive producer. I hope this clarifies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iz55 (talk • contribs) 01:06, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The credits page, https://www.allmusic.com/artist/ed-cash-mn0000179345/credits, lists the artist for the work as "Annette". I was looking for "Lee". My error. But you're still a WP:SPA and you should avoid that. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:11, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ok thanks, will bear that in mind and broaden my edits. thanks very much for the guidance! Iz55 (talk) 01:22, 9 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ed_Cash&oldid=1200680051"