User talk:PriscillaAnne

In response to your feedback[edit]

Can I ask what edits are being rejected? It looks like all of yours on Priscilla McLean went through and were saved as of just a moment ago.

I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 18:00, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, PriscillaAnne. You have new messages at I Jethrobot's talk page.
Message added 02:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 02:52, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barton McLean, composer, performer, writer, music reviewer.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 09:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your feedback[edit]

Well, I do not know about what you tried to do at commons, so you will have to ask over there.

Lectonar (talk) 21:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Barton McLean, composer, performer, writer, music reviewer.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page. Please remember to link to the submission!
You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 15:31, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Barton McLean, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Bjelleklang - talk 00:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013[edit]

Hello, I'm Laser brain. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Electronic music because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Laser brain (talk) 21:38, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Help me![edit]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Help me with...I added quotation marks to the comments on Priscilla McLean's life, to show that the text is a quotation from the author about Ms. McLean and not my own. This is a highly prestigious book ("New Grove Dictionary of Music") and not a self-promotion vehicle, so the laudatory comments in quotation marks should be acceptable to Wikipedia. Therefore, I ask that the top warnings be dropped from this biography. PriscillaAnne (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PriscillaAnne (talk) 17:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm confused, which is the quotation? The large block of italicized text? We don't use italics for quotations, we typically just use quotation marks. However a block that big needs to be formatted differently. The passage itself is problematic because we haven't stated that this is an opinion. Further, since we strive for a neutral point of view, a glowing review like that should probably be balanced with a negative view if possible. Or we can cite the book for a description of her work, but cut the jive flowery language because it's not helping. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:42, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: Okay, so I've cut the gushing portion of the quotation, while leaving the description of your work. Or I assume it's your work, what with sources referring to the subject as "Priscilla Anne" McLean. :) I think what is also needed in the article is a section on your work, and that's where the Grove description should go, because it's weirdly out of place in "Life". Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:12, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, you have sterilized my "life" section of Priscilla McLean's biography, so there is no hint of promotional writing. Why, then is there still a bar across the top of the article? Whether I know Priscilla McLean or not, this should not interfere with the writing here, which has been examined, edited, and approved. What else can I do? I know of no negative articles, short of music reviews, that could show another side to this (underrated) composer. PriscillaAnne (talk) 20:49, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I "sterilized" it. I removed unnecessary and overly effusive statements from the article, and what is left is factual. After removing the gushing praise, I also removed the peacock template. The remaining template is to alert other editors that a major contributor, i.e. you, may have a conflict of interest, and we should keep an eye on the article to help guide it toward neutrality. And you're right, whether you know her or not, it doesn't entirely matter, as long as the contributions are consistent with the community's guidelines and policies, particularly the expectation of neutrality. When articles are written to meet certain criteria, they can achieve "Good Article" status. Here is a list of music-related "Good Articles". Some of them might give some perspective on the type of information that should be included and excluded. Anyhow, I hope you don't take my corrections personally. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, PriscillaAnne. You have new messages at I JethroBT's talk page.
Message added 18:27, 24 January 2014 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

I, JethroBT ^{drop me a line} 18:27, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]