User:Joedumlao/sandbox

These are just some notes on what I have been trying to do with Jackie Evancho's Wikipedia page. There has been an entry made referring to Tim Pages criticism of Jackie Evancho, what I had been trying to do was highlight another part of his article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/talented-young-musicians-run-the-risk-of-burning-out-early/2011/12/23/gIQANhUeQP_story.html?tid=sm_btn_tw where he mentions "I mistrust the “cute kid” brigade for two principal reasons: It is deeply exploitative and often ruinous to young artists, and it transforms age — which, after all, provides a natural accumulation of musical and personal experience — into a liability for more seasoned players. You’re the hottest thing around at age 11, making millions every year. Where will you be at 21, as you begin to enter full maturity? And who will look at you when you are in your 30s? There will always be somebody younger than you are; adulthood becomes a threat instead of a natural process." What I am trying to point out is that he has a problem with all child singers and not just Jackie Evancho. This point is not addressed in Jackie's article, you have to go to the article to see this and it's on the second page. Probably a great majority of the Wikipedia readers will not even go to the footnotes and actually click on the Reference link.


 * Hi, Joe. I've been editing Wikipedia (WP) articles for almost 6 years, and if you look at my user page, you will see that I have worked on a lot of articles that have been highly rated by other editors here.  Here are my 2 cents about this:  I don't see why you want to give more ink to Page's criticisms - that would only make them more prominent in Jackie Evancho's entry on Wikipedia, and it would ensure that far more people read his nonsense.  I think most people will take his word for what he says, because he is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist.  So, featuring his article by quoting more of it is not, I strongly believe, in Jackie Evancho's interest.  The current footnote 157 in her entry already makes it abundantly clear that Mr. Page has a problem with child prodigies in classical music.  That footnote says: "Page has written similar opinion pieces criticizing classical crossover artists and child prodigies, such as "A Critic's Closing Lines: Tim Page, Leaving on A Fond & Hopeful Note", The Washington Post, July 11, 1999 ... and his memoir, Parallel Play: Growing Up with Undiagnosed Asperger's, in which he discusses his own unhappy experience as a talented child."
 * It is my opinion that adding the longer Page quote here is also inconsistent with our guideline WP:UNDUE. Note, moreover, that two other experienced Wikipedia editors (Dr. K and Tim riley) have removed the material that you wish to add.  The material might be more appropriate in the Tim Page article, but I think that if you tried to add it there, he and probably others would fight it tooth and nail.  Really, I don't think it's worth it.  My advice to you, for what it's worth, is to edit a few other articles on Wikipedia that interest you, but where you have have a less emotional connection, and you will learn a lot about how we decide what should or should not go into the entries in this encyclopedia.  For more information on this subject, the relevant guidelines are: WP:NEUTRAL, WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP.  All the best!   -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:44, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok let's forget about Page, he's a biased and lost cause. How about expanding on the Fight Night performance under "Other Performances" -- posted by Joedumlao


 * What do you think is missing about Jackie's participation in Fight Night? Here's the thing: Jackie's article is very long already.   You should be able to read a Wikipedia article while sitting on the can. :-)  As Jackie keeps performing, we need to discuss more and more information, and so the article keeps getting longer and longer.  I just added a sentence on the three new concerts this week (see the "Dream With Me" section).  Other editors may decide that it is too long and demand that it be cut back.  So, the best way to defend the information that is already there is to keep it as efficient as possible.   We need to work hard to keep it as short as possible. So, I don't think we should expand anything in the historical performances; in fact, as time goes on, we will need to streamline the information about older performances.  What I always do is think to myself: "In 20 years, what will a reader most want to know about Jackie's activities from 2008 to 2012?"  -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:28, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Ssilvers, please read this article, maybe we can make a comment on Tim Page's Wiki entry: http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/12012/1202859-388-0.stm


 * Hi. Unfortunately, "feedback" is not an acceptable source on Wikipedia.  Please read this guideline if you want to learn what kinds of sources are acceptable to cite in this encyclopedia.  Also, please do not use people's first names on talk pages here unless it is in their user name.  My user name is meant to protect my privacy (what little privacy is left to people on the internet).  :-)   BTW, my advice is to forget about TP.  He is water under the bridge, and you have to look hard in Jackie's article to even find the reference to his article.  Most people don't even know or care who he is.  Note that I already have St. Petersburg in there!  All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:46, 14 April 2012 (UTC)