User talk:Grb1848

Hi Grb, thanks for your message about Sandra Seaton. There are still large sections of the article that are not referenced, so that tag can't really be removed yet. It wouldn't take much work for the extra cites to be added. The article has had a problem with fans adding material that comes across as promotional, that is, heavily biasing the content to Seaton's advantage. Wikipedia is first and foremost an encyclopedia and we aim for the tone you might find in Britannica. We try and keep things factual as the article is not a fan page or a blog. I'm not suggesting you have been involved in this but you might pass this info along to others in your group. Seaton is best served by having a strong, objective, factual, well referenced article rather than a hagiography. I hope that makes sense. Have a great weekend. Best wishes Span (talk) 13:58, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I have added some biog refs and have taken down the tag. Best wishes Span (talk) 15:21, 27 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hi, the Further Reading section is used for essays and books. See articles such as Martin Luther King, Jr., Georgette Heyer, Malcolm X, Michael Jordan and W. E. B. Du Bois. It's not a general collection of links. The reviews given in Allmusic, Timeout, Washington Post and Opera News would be best used, referenced, within the article. Span (talk) 20:30, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Span. I appreciate your helpful and clear explanation about further reading entries and their place in articles. Makes a lot of sense. Sorry for any confusion related to the correction I made this past weekend. I corrected Shuffle Along date and typos at 13:14 then tried to revise the "talk" at 13:15 to sound more polite and professional. Should have left well enough alone. Went right back to my original correction at 13:18 Grb1848 (talk) 15:51, 29 April 2013 (UTC)