This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Rainbow Cadenza article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm the author of The Rainbow Cadenza. I'm also the owner of Pulpless.Com, which published the 1999 trade paperback reprint edition -- the fourth time this novel has been in print, following its original 1983 Simon & Schuster hardcover, the 1984 New English Library large-format paperback, and the 1986 Avon Books rack-sized mass-market paperback.
Earlier today I came to the Wikipedia stub page for The Rainbow Cadenza, which had an inaccurate quotation from the Pulpless.Com catalog page for The Rainbow Cadenza, and attributed the text to me as the book's author, which is incorrect. So I substituted an accurate quotation of that page, and properly attributed it to Pulpless.Com.
Then I arrived back to check on the page and found out that all content except for the reference to the novel's winning the 1984 Prometheus Award had been deleted.
If someone wants to go to the trouble of reading and researching The Rainbow Cadenza -- and I am more than happy to aid them in this endeavor -- that would be fine with me. But deleting all information about this award-winning novel because I corrected material quoted from the Publisher's catalog page is an unfair and unacceptable action.
J. Neil Schulman jneil@pulpless.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jneil ( talk • contribs)
Nobody objected, so I reverted to the last version containing Lquilter's plot summary. I expect J. Neil Schulman to improve the articale as discusseed above and I expect other editors to not bite the newbie as discussed above. I anyone has a problem with this, please discuss. Guy Macon 04:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Orangemike deleted it again, ignoring my plea to discuss it on this talk page rather than engaging in a revert war. I reverted his deletion, and again ask him to please try to get a consensus rather than repeatedly deleting something that at least two editors think should be improved rather than nuked. Guy Macon 08:06, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Complete agree with Orangemike, that text is completely unacceptable as part of a wikipedia article and should be deleted on sight. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 15:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
FOLLOWUP: As soon as J. Neil Schulman and I had our first email conversation about what he perceived to be problems with this page I immediately stopped editing and/or reverting the article so as to avoid any conflict of interest. I encouraged J. Neil Schulman (by email and on this talk page - see above) to work with us and become a valuable asset to Wikipedia, learning how to contribute to and improve articles about him and his works while avoiding any appearance of self-serving or conflict of interest as per WP:BLPEDIT. Alas, he stopped responding, here or by email.
While doing a search in order to write this followup, I discovered that Orangemike ( talk) had opened up an entry on the Conflict of interest Noticeboard ( Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_42#User:Jneil) in which he accused me of bad faith editing without notifying me here or on my talk page that he had made such an accusation in a place where I wouldn't see it. He wrote "Jneil appears to have gone home; but another editor, User:Guymacon, has taken up the cudgels, and keeps re-inserting the same block of advertising copy, and accusing me of edit warring when I remove it again." For the record, my exact words were "Orangemike deleted it again, ignoring my plea to discuss it on this talk page rather than engaging in a revert war." That is exactly what happened. I reverted his deletion with the comment "Orangemike, two editors disagree with you. Please discuss on talk page rather than engaging in a revert war", and he responded by reverting again without any discussion. Guy Macon 08:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
The Rainbow Cadenza article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm the author of The Rainbow Cadenza. I'm also the owner of Pulpless.Com, which published the 1999 trade paperback reprint edition -- the fourth time this novel has been in print, following its original 1983 Simon & Schuster hardcover, the 1984 New English Library large-format paperback, and the 1986 Avon Books rack-sized mass-market paperback.
Earlier today I came to the Wikipedia stub page for The Rainbow Cadenza, which had an inaccurate quotation from the Pulpless.Com catalog page for The Rainbow Cadenza, and attributed the text to me as the book's author, which is incorrect. So I substituted an accurate quotation of that page, and properly attributed it to Pulpless.Com.
Then I arrived back to check on the page and found out that all content except for the reference to the novel's winning the 1984 Prometheus Award had been deleted.
If someone wants to go to the trouble of reading and researching The Rainbow Cadenza -- and I am more than happy to aid them in this endeavor -- that would be fine with me. But deleting all information about this award-winning novel because I corrected material quoted from the Publisher's catalog page is an unfair and unacceptable action.
J. Neil Schulman jneil@pulpless.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jneil ( talk • contribs)
Nobody objected, so I reverted to the last version containing Lquilter's plot summary. I expect J. Neil Schulman to improve the articale as discusseed above and I expect other editors to not bite the newbie as discussed above. I anyone has a problem with this, please discuss. Guy Macon 04:31, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Orangemike deleted it again, ignoring my plea to discuss it on this talk page rather than engaging in a revert war. I reverted his deletion, and again ask him to please try to get a consensus rather than repeatedly deleting something that at least two editors think should be improved rather than nuked. Guy Macon 08:06, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Complete agree with Orangemike, that text is completely unacceptable as part of a wikipedia article and should be deleted on sight. -- Cameron Scott ( talk) 15:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
FOLLOWUP: As soon as J. Neil Schulman and I had our first email conversation about what he perceived to be problems with this page I immediately stopped editing and/or reverting the article so as to avoid any conflict of interest. I encouraged J. Neil Schulman (by email and on this talk page - see above) to work with us and become a valuable asset to Wikipedia, learning how to contribute to and improve articles about him and his works while avoiding any appearance of self-serving or conflict of interest as per WP:BLPEDIT. Alas, he stopped responding, here or by email.
While doing a search in order to write this followup, I discovered that Orangemike ( talk) had opened up an entry on the Conflict of interest Noticeboard ( Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_42#User:Jneil) in which he accused me of bad faith editing without notifying me here or on my talk page that he had made such an accusation in a place where I wouldn't see it. He wrote "Jneil appears to have gone home; but another editor, User:Guymacon, has taken up the cudgels, and keeps re-inserting the same block of advertising copy, and accusing me of edit warring when I remove it again." For the record, my exact words were "Orangemike deleted it again, ignoring my plea to discuss it on this talk page rather than engaging in a revert war." That is exactly what happened. I reverted his deletion with the comment "Orangemike, two editors disagree with you. Please discuss on talk page rather than engaging in a revert war", and he responded by reverting again without any discussion. Guy Macon 08:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)