Talk:Selina Dolaro

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Mid-importance).

Women in Music Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music 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.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Age[edit]

If the dates given are correct, then she wasn't 49 at the time of her death, as the article states. --Thf1977 19:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, she was 39. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New book[edit]

The dates for the years are correct but check the exact date of death. The only full length biography is in the online book Belasco from Boxing to Theatre and Film. This book should be added as a reference to pages about David James Belasco, David Belasco, Selina Dolaro, and Jay Belasco, and also to references about Aby Belasco the boxer. For most of these people it is the only accurate source of information. For David Belasco the playwright, it corrects some of the myths which David Belasco made up and were used in his biography by William Winter. -- Davidbelasco (talk) 15:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Belasco from Boxing to Theatre and Film appears to be a self-published book available only on Lulu. This does not appear to be a WP:Reliable source, and it is not an accessible External Link, so please do not cite it in articles, unless it later is discussed in mainstream reviews. If it is a significant book, it should shortly have such reviews. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first edition of the book is already listed in university libraries on world cat most widely held works.

http://orlabs.oclc.org/identities/np-belasco%20family/

It is also listed on Boston University Fanciulla project as a reference work for the project.

http://people.bu.edu/burtond/resources/Research/6i3.BUHF2Application.pdf

Davidbelasco (talk) 02:01, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

David, please read WP:Reliable sources very carefully. Since the book is self-published on Lulu, before it can be cited, it needs to be reviewed favorably in the mainstream media or described as reliable by mainstream sources. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:34, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was amused to read in the article how Selina "raised four children as a single mother". That would have been somewhat difficult since the children lived with their father in England and not in America with her. Selina's letter quoted later about how "we" slave to bring up children and make them "useful members of society" is just one of her hissy fits. She had no idea how to bring up children. When her son finally went to America to support her, he did so by robbery. He became a well known criminal in New York and spent years in prison. The most treacherous thing he did was to rob one of his mother's friends of every cent she owned. I will spare the details how he got away with that. It is in the book "Belasco from Boxing to Theatre and Film". Davidbelasco (talk) 09:20, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is the source that the Wikipedia article relies on for this information. Do you have a reliable source that disputes it?: http://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/dolaro-selina -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:30, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Selina Dolaro/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article should be assessed at "start", because it is still missing a lot of information about Dolaro's career and life. It really only contains the information readily available about her on the internet, and none of the editors contributing so far has done any library research or obtained Madame Dolaro's biography. -- Ssilvers 20:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 01:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 05:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Infobox removal[edit]

Please stop removing the infobox because one editor dislikes them. It's part of a request from a Wikiproject. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Jewish_Women Nashona (talk) 18:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Manual of Style says: "Whether to include an infobox ... is determined through discussion and consensus among the editors at each individual article." While sports and politician bios can benefit from infoboxes, most articles in liberal arts fields, as here, do not. See arbitration report: "Infoboxes may be particularly unsuited to liberal arts fields when they repeat information already available in the lead section of the article, are misleading or oversimplify the topic for the reader". I disagree with including an infobox in this article because: (1) The box would emphasize unimportant factoids stripped of context and lacking nuance, in competition with the WP:LEAD section, which emphasizes and contextualizes the most important facts. (2) Since the most important points in the article are already discussed in the Lead, or adequately discussed in the body of the article, the box would be redundant. (3) It would take up valuable space at the top of the article and hamper the layout and impact of the Lead. (4) Frequent errors creep into infoboxes, as updates are made to the articles but not reflected in the redundant info in the box, and they tend to draw vandalism, fancruft and repeated arguments among editors about what to include. (5) The infobox template creates a block of code at the top of the edit screen that discourages new editors from editing the article. (6) It would discourage readers from reading the text of the article. (7) IBs distract editors from focusing on the content of the article. Instead of improving the article, they spend time working on this repetitive feature and its coding and formatting. See also WP:DISINFOBOX. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox not needed as it should contain nothing that will be in a well-written lead section. I agree with the detailed and eloquent statement by Ssilvers above. Jack1956 (talk) 22:48, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No info-box needed. Entirely concur with the two editors above. Info-boxes are useful for many articles, and in biographies of sportspeople, politicians, clergy et al, where posts held or key career statistics can be highlighted, but for most arts Life and Works articles they are woolly and unhelpful to our readers. We should not be insulting readers' intelligence by telling them what is already abundantly clear to them from the adjoining text. Tim riley talk 22:59, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Infobox not needed: Support per thorough explanation by Ssilvers above. Infobox wouldn't improve the article in this case and wouldn't assist in readability/accessibility. Sean Stephens (talk) 00:28, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would want to see the infobox included if only because of the following benefits: the career of the individual is one that includes many various details, and an infobox would highlight the most notable elements (e.g. as singer/actress and theatre manager, not her attempts at being an author). Also in this case her stage name, birth name could be best displayed in an infobox rather than clutter the lead sentence (her full married name can be excluded from opening paragraph, but kept in the infobox). I think the general objection to the infobox is a bit strained (perhaps more indicative of a stylistics or aesthetic preference) as from a visitor's point of view, an infobox for historical individuals with multifaceted legacies would be a welcome addition to the page. I.am.a.qwerty (talk) 08:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]