Jump to content

Talk:Mary Wilson (singer): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
re-assess
Line 40: Line 40:


Is this mentioned in the artcle. Proof is in her book where she uses it during the 70's and don't forget to mention her affair with Tom Jones.[[User:Saimaroimaru 2008|Saimaroimaru 2008]] ([[User talk:Saimaroimaru 2008|talk]]) 21:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Is this mentioned in the artcle. Proof is in her book where she uses it during the 70's and don't forget to mention her affair with Tom Jones.[[User:Saimaroimaru 2008|Saimaroimaru 2008]] ([[User talk:Saimaroimaru 2008|talk]]) 21:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

== Completely Biased ==

I'm a huge Supremes fan and this article is absolutely the most unscholarly thing I've read on a Motown act. It reads like it was written by a "fan" and not folks actually interested in providing a concise and balanced article. The discography is proof - did every "Ooh" and "Aah" need to be noted? Miss Wilson deserves better and there is absolutely NO personal information other than about her childhood. What about her marriages? Children? Aforementioned drug abuse? If her band and label mates are subject to the same discussion points, she should be as well.

Revision as of 00:57, 10 June 2014

Propaganda

This was NOT written by the singer herself, but by a fan. Wikipedia needs to make sure to watch the person that keeps changing the bio. This person spews hatred and untrue facts about the legendary singer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.212.92.148 (talk) 13:30, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Birth Date

Please check the birth date. I believe the correct date is March 6 Epicidiot 05:29, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, as does numerous websites. Main article date changed to 6 March 1944 accordingly.
Derek R Bullamore 11:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Mwilson.jpg

Image:Mwilson.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:35, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strange

Yes, I agree with the one who thinks that the bio seems written by Mary Wilson. By the way, why the comment was removed? Censorship is not a good thing. Anyway, a fan is neither the best qualified to write about a celebrity. Where are the reliable facts? the references? This hagiographic page does no good to Mary Wilson and seems just like an extension of her autobiography (by the way that's a book that "spews hatred and untrue facts"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.46.28.17 (talk) 13:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Strange

Yes, I agree with the one who thinks that the bio seems written by Mary Wilson. By the way, why the comment was removed? Censorship is not a good thing. Anyway, a fan is neither the best qualified to write about a celebrity. Where are the reliable facts? the references? This hagiographic page does no good to Mary Wilson and seems just like an extension of her autobiography (by the way that's a book that "spews hatred and untrue facts"). 90.46.28.17 (talk) 13:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah if your a ross fan.Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) 21:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crack Addition

Is this mentioned in the artcle. Proof is in her book where she uses it during the 70's and don't forget to mention her affair with Tom Jones.Saimaroimaru 2008 (talk) 21:48, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Completely Biased

I'm a huge Supremes fan and this article is absolutely the most unscholarly thing I've read on a Motown act. It reads like it was written by a "fan" and not folks actually interested in providing a concise and balanced article. The discography is proof - did every "Ooh" and "Aah" need to be noted? Miss Wilson deserves better and there is absolutely NO personal information other than about her childhood. What about her marriages? Children? Aforementioned drug abuse? If her band and label mates are subject to the same discussion points, she should be as well.