Talk:Jeanie Lambe

Introduction amendment
As brother-in-law to Jeanie, I was asked by her son to amend the introduction as follows:- ‘Jeanie Lambe (23 December 1940 – 29 May 2020) was an International jazz singer, well known for her dynamic live performances, and a legacy of fine recordings. She was married to jazz tenor saxophonist great, Danny Moss MBE.’ He felt that it better described her as an artist who performed all over the world headlining and also working with her husband Danny. Although based in WA, they travelled to the USA and Europe, up until Danny passed. She is of course a Jazz singer born in Scotland, and we are proud of her heritage. I have added to the discussion to help clarify the request to amend the introduction. Lallythelamb200648 (talk) 13:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia's articles are intended to be factual, not opinionated. Encyclopedias are compilations of facts. This is a fact: Lambe was a Scottish jazz singer. This is opinion: "International jazz singer". I'm not sure what this means or why it's capitalized. Do you mean popular around the world? No, she wasn't. I doubt there is such a thing as a "popular" jazz singer, certainly not one who is popular all over the world, except perhaps for Michael Buble, and not everything he does is jazz.


 * This is opinion: "well known for her dynamic live performances". Note the adjectives. The noun is "performance". That's a fact. She performed. We can prove it. That her performances were dynamic (adjective) is someone's opinion.
 * This is opinion: "legacy of fine recordings". She made recordings. That's a fact. That they are "fine" is someone's opinion.
 * This is opinion: "She was married to jazz tenor saxophonist great, Danny Moss." That she was married to Danny Moss is a fact. We can prove it. That he was great (adjective) is someone's opinion.


 * If someone connected to Moss or Lamb is writing this article, that is a conflict of interest and therefore forbidden by Wikipedia. Involved parties close to the subject have trouble being impartial. They are more likely to write opinions than facts. Wikipedia wants facts, not opinions. Being in Wikipedia is a privilege, not a right. Wikipedia has rules, methods, and standards. These govern the articles. They are not governed by the desires or ideas of partisans. Wikipedia owns the articles and can do what it pleases with them. It could delete every one.


 * Before reverting my edits again and threatening me again, the writer of this article ought to be read some of Wikpedia's documentation, such as


 * Conflict of interest
 * Core content policies
 * Notability (people)
 * What Wikipedia is not
 * Vmavanti (talk) 17:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)