User talk:Maclauk

RE: Email
Hi, thanks for your email. I appreciate the addition of your information to the Glastonbury Festival 2009 article – much of which remains (albeit potentially reworded etc.). However, the reason I made an edit of your contribution was that although your information may be correct, it was speculative and did not provide verification for the existence of social inequalities and – I guess – "classes" of punters. Personally, when leaving the site, I was surprised that I couldn't get to gate A from the John Peel field. It is a fact that the hospitality area has changed access to these areas – but we must find sources to attribute any opinions on this change.

Also, phrases such as "enjoy the festival" and "if you have either the money or industry contacts" should be avoided. I don't think that the latter is relevant (especially the money part) and "enjoying the festival" is point of view. I'm also not sure that the Camp Kerala addition is relevant; I believe there's a number of external bodies providing accommodation outside the festival site (including camping, hotels etc.) and unless CK is shown to be exceptional (and especially linked to the festival) with reliable sources – rather than the company's home page – I don't think we should include it.

I am more than happy to discuss this (here), and am grateful that another editor has stepped up to help write the article! Cheers! Fribbulus Xax (talk) 13:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I have already acknowledged the improvements made by you in some instances of style.

The fact that you can buy you way into a Tipi for the cost of £800 and that the hospitality section of the site is now so large and apparent does provide strong evidence that a two tier nature is creeping into Glastonbury. You can either pay a lot of money or blag an industry pass to gain improved accommodations and facilities. It is certainly worth debate.

I would also suggest that the issue of money or privilege to gain access to better standards of accommodation IS a very relevant issue for a festival with the ethos that Glastonbury has. There are many overtly commercial festivals out there and Glastonbury is different, but there may be commercial "creep" in its organisation.

The problem of sources is going to prove tricky. You and I are both first hand sources who were adversely affected by the new hospitality area. The majority of sources are from the media who benefited from this and are unlikely to provide suitable source material. I could write a quick external blog post but this would carry no more weight than our direct contributions.

--Maclauk (talk) 14:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Glastonbury Festival attendance
I moved your comment to a new section before replying, hope you don't mind.--Pontificalibus (talk) 09:29, 1 July 2011 (UTC)