Talk:Stanley Dorfman

Bowie
Unfortunately, my English is worthless. But I'd like to see someone add that Dorfman directed "Heroes" by David Bowie. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03g18sx

Recent additions
Good job on the recent additions, but some important things to keep in mind.


 * 1) Albums, websites, magazine, films, radio and TV series, books, etc. should be placed in italics only (MOS:ITALICTITLE); there are a LOT of violations of that.
 * 2) There are lots of spaces between sources and punctuation (i.e., [1])
 * 3) You don't need an explanatory note for every newspapers.com cite
 * 4) Try your best to remove citations from the lead section per MOS:LEAD. The lead should ideally only be a summary of cited info in the body, save for direct quotes
 * 5) I would install this script for MOS:DASH issues
 * 6) Keep an eye out for duplicate links (this script helps with that)
 * 7) "The" in artist names should be lowercased mid-sentence per MOS:THEMUSIC

Thought I'd give you some helpful hints for the article and future endeavors. Great job so far. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 21:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I have dedicated significant effort to creating this article about Dorfman, a figure who has been frequently mentioned in the music books I've read, and whose shows I vividly remember from my childhood in the UK. I discovered that there was very little information available about him or his television shows on Wikipedia. The existing content was poorly sourced and written. Given my newfound enthusiasm for editing Wikipedia, I have invested a substantial amount of time and conducted extensive research to improve the article. I genuinely value your guidance and appreciate your advice. I will carefully consider all the suggestions you have provided and move forward having taken them on board. Thank you! SacredLotus7 (talk) 05:17, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * No problem! If you need more guidance here or on WP in general feel free to ask, or visit the Teahouse. Cheers. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 22:35, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * That's great, thank you! FYI, I wen't through almost the entire article yesterday and implemented your suggestions, but when I went to publish it there was an editing conflict, so I've started again from scratch just now. I'm going to go section by section to avoid it happening again. I didn't know about Teahouse, that's looks v helpful too. All best. SacredLotus7 (talk) 04:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Hey there, I'm not sure what you're ending goal for the article is (GA, FA, etc.) but it might not hurt to open a peer review once you have the article closer to your desired goal. This page doesn't seem like it gets a lot of traffic or has a lot of watchers so it may help getting a few extra eyes. Just a thought! All the best. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 19:26, 2 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you. My goal for this article is to improve it, specifically focusing on Dorfman’s notable role in and contributions to the fields or music and music television during the 1960s and 1970s. Despite the significant impact of him and his work, information about it was previously absent from Wikipedia. I understand that the article may not attract substantial attention at present. However, considering the continued relevance of his work due to its ongoing inclusion in music documentaries and books and ongoing television broadcasts, I want to document it and his impact accurately. I aim to ensure that the article aligns with Wikipedia's purpose and guidelines, and to maintain a neutral tone and avoid any semblance of a biased piece. This said, the majority of references I have come across regarding Dorfman and his work stem from autobiographies, biographies, and references by notable musicians, who frequently describe him using words such "pioneer" and acknowledge his "exceptional" and “historic” contributions, which makes neutrality somewhat of a feat! I have and will continue to actively seek critical opinions or negative feedback on Dorfman and his work too. However, to date, I have not encountered any negative criticism. I remain open and committed to including diverse perspectives and will continue my search for alternative viewpoints. I have compiled numerous references from many sources, which I am currently reviewing as time permits, and will use as appropriate to enrich the article. Your ongoing guidance and advice is deeply appreciated. I agree with you, it would be beneficial to initiate a peer review process (which I did not know existed, that’s great), and I will pursue that avenue. However, I would like to bring the article to a solid standard before proceeding. Your mention of the terms "GA" and "FA" led me to discover their existence, and I will read up on them and research their requirements. This said, as a newcomer to Wikipedia, I acknowledge that I have a learning curve ahead of me, and these categories may be out of reach for now. Nevertheless, I am always up for a challenge and take pride in putting in the necessary effort to ensure accuracy, completeness, and integrity in all I do. I will diligently work towards making the article worthy of inclusion in these categories, regardless of whether it officially attains GA of FA status. And then I look forward to starting to work on other articles, too. FYI, I just shortened the lead section of this one, but I have left the length tag for your discretion to remove as necessary. All the best. SacredLotus7 (talk) 20:30, 2 July 2023 (UTC)