Talk:Laura Calder

Unknown Birthdate

I have removed the two conflicting mentions of Calder's birthdate (April 20th or 21st 1970), because I cannot find any reliable reference to her date of birth on the Internet (I have scanned interviews and online biographies, to no avail). If somebody else can find it in a good, accessible source, or if Calder decides to publish the info on her website, please feel free to add her birthdate to the article with a proper citation. I'm not sure citing a vague "Happy Birthday" twitter message to Calder counts. :-) Alanna the Brave (talk) 15:45, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Do not revert

Page contents reverted to version provided and approved by Ms. Calder. PLEASE do not change content of page. For further questions, contact management@lauracalder.com Mynymail (talk) 05:13, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

That is not how wikipedia works. This is not lauracalder.com Reverted back to December version, as this addresses some of the issues with the current version; no references and un-wikilike. There were no significant edits in the interim that I could see, simply sectioning of text and flagging the article for the aforementioned issues. --Belg4mit (talk) 03:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Exactly, it doesn't matter if it's approved by her or not. If it has no references, it has the potential to be removed. Wikipedia is not based on if it's approved or not. If you need to learn the fundamentals of Wikipedia, you should look them up. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 03:16, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

So you'd rather win your argument on the grounds of wikipedia's open source framework than to care that the information is wrong and that the person who's career you're trying to describe takes issue with your incorrect facts? For starters, that's not her birthday and you've got the order of her career wrong. For what reason? Look, just write an email to management@lauracalder.com, you'll get an auto-reply, and someone from her management team will get back to you to explain what they don't like in their own words if you don't believe mine. Best way to handle it, I think.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynymail (talk) • contribs) 14:21, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

This is from the biographies of living persons policies: "We must get the article right. Be very firm about the use of high quality sources. All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be explicitly attributed to a reliable, published source, which is usually done with an inline citation." How can you argue that your edit must remain if you have no source for your false information and I have the actual living person claiming the false information?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynymail (talk) • contribs) 14:47, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

You can't use an email as a source. You are quick to claim everything as false yet you are not bothering to fix the incorrect information and provide a source. Unless you are willing to do that, than you need to stop complaining. Plus it's not about what someone approves as "right." Yes we can question it, but we can't just go around saying so and so not on Wikipedia approved it. If that were the case than Wikipedia would not be edited by just anyone. So WP:GETOVERIT and you are making finding sources Wikipedia:Somebody Else's Problem. I would stop that. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 23:50, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Right, so I repeat. You're ok with publishing incorrect facts just because you found some incorrect citation? Is that what you're saying? Now your response will be: "The things you are claiming as fact don't have any citations. Why should we believe you?". I agree! I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, I have no way of referencing something Laura Calder told me herself to change. So, if getting this page so accurate is something which you're clearly very passionate about, which again I totally am ok with, then why wouldn't you, as a means of nailing down the facts, want to email the address I told you and simply ask her to verify the things I changed. You don't even have to get into details. Just say, "I'm the person who has been changing your wikipedia info. In the interest of getting it right, can you please tell me what things are in the current info that you disagree with?" I promise you, she will write you back and explain. There's your reference. This isn't about me, this about her not wanting incorrect info on there if it can at all be helped. Otherwise, can't you see how it would look like you were actually interested in publishing wrong info? Can't you see how it would look like that? What's the harm in writing to her to see what her problems are with the info? Unless you have no interest in what she thinks about her own life? Just think about it from that perspective for a minute and see if you can't see it from my side instead of trying to rudely tell me what to do with the unnecessary "I would stop that" comment. Also, you're assuming I don't WANT to reference things. I can't. It came from her! Teach me how to handle that citation then so I can get it right. And don't cop out with the "you should figure it out on your own" excuse. Just point me in the direction of an answer if it's not too much trouble and I'll take care of correcting those things. I just wish you could put into words for me why YOUR facts about her are so important. That's all. Have a nice day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynymail (talk • contribs) 21:05, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

If you can't reference what is said to be "true" than it can be potentially removed. Plus how are we to believe that you are corresponding with her? Just because you say so, it doesn't mean it's true. As I stated, there is NO way to use an email as a reference. Emails are subjective majority of the time. There are a myriad of citation templates for specific things like web citations, news citations, book citations, etc.. So start at WP:CITE to read up on citations. Once done reading that, than look at WP:CT to get the right template for citations. The most common is a web citation template. I'd also use the news citation template so you can cite news properly. Don't be lazy with your references and stick your reference between HTML reference tags. Do it properly. Mr. C.C.^{Hey yo!}_{I didn't do it!} 16:12, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Hey, Sorry to be such a pain about this but again, I'm not asking that you believe me. I'm simply suggesting that YOU write to that email address, management@lauracalder.com, and verify for yourself. How are you to believe? Contact that address, explain that you have edited her info and ask her is there a person you know that's been trying to help you straighten out your wiki page? She will, without questions answer all those questions. Of course I don't expect you to take my word for it. That's why I keep telling you to write a fast and simple email! Check for yourself! There's nothing I can do to convince you and I just want to help a friend. Do you understand? And AGAIN, I am not trying to use an email as a citation, I only intend for you to use the email to see if I'm telling you the truth! That's all. Seriously, write the email. It'll take you 5 minutes! Thanks for the other info, I appreciate it. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mynymail (talk • contribs) 08:56, 20 February 2012 (UTC) Where's your reference for her birthday. It's not correct. So, you don't have to list references but I do?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.237.246.213 (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)