Talk:Trans-Lux

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Connecticut Low‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Added information about Fair Play Scoreboards, and other information about the company. Translux was removed from the NYSE (American Exchange) in November, 2010. Stock price was last reported at $0.285 pshr at last close before removal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.149.230 (talk) 01:46, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Seven Year Itch[edit]

Trans-Lux 52nd Street Theatre, 586 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10154 Seven Year ItchXb2u7Zjzc32 (talk)

Is the book "Trans-Lux, Biography of a Corporation" by Grenz an appropriate source?[edit]

I'm drafting an article that is closely related to the Trans-Lux article. I have been given to believe that this book may not suit the Wikipedia standards for accessibility, and maybe even reliability. Don't get me wrong. I have the book and I think it's an incredibly valuable resource. But the book was self-published by the company (as many corporate histories are-does that automatically disqualify them?), and it was not super widely distributed, as far as I can tell, which is also typical of self-published corporate histories. It can't be found in the New York Public Library, for example, although ironically the earlier (1929) self-published Trans-Lux corporate history can be found there. Trans-Lux had moved its HQ to Connecticut by 1982, so it's probably in the Connecticut libraries. Yes, Grenz can be purchased on Amazon for $20-25, so it's not impossible to acquire. I asked for help on my article and an editor terrified me with the word "ephemera", referring to some Trans-Lux advertising brochures I had obtained. He said these are not good sources for Wikipedia because they were never published, per se. I have been bending over backward to avoid using Grenz as a source because, although it was (self-)published, it borders on ephemera and is not an independent source, even though my life would be made much easier if I could just use it. I've been doing nips and tucks on articles for years, but now that I'm drafting a new article, I really feel lost at sea, so your comments are most welcome. Thank you! Milst1 (talk) 16:44, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, nobody answered, but I thought about it some more and I think the source is fine. In the Wikipedia:Reliable sources article in the section on self-published sources, it says self-published sources can be used if the material is neither "unduly self-serving" nor makes an "exceptional claim", does not make claims about third parties, doesn't involve unrelated claims, has no doubts as to its authenticity, and is not based on such sources. I think that there is inherently a self-serving nature to self-published company histories, but there is also a great deal of usable information within them. As private organizations, companies have access that outsiders do not, and, moreover, they may be the only entity bothering to keep score at all. I'd still love to hear someone else's thoughts, but I don't even know how to get anyone's attention here.Milst1 (talk) 23:20, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]