Talk:Marilyn Michaels

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Musicians

	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.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comedy Low‑importance

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Composers Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Composers, a group of editors writing and developing biographical articles about composers of all eras and styles. The project discussion page is the place to talk about technical and editorial issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!ComposersWikipedia:WikiProject ComposersTemplate:WikiProject ComposersComposers articles
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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 writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music

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

Speedy request

Virtually everything here seems to be drawn from the article subject's website, http://www.marilynmichaels.com/ . While editors have done some touchup work on the article, it's just putting lipstick on a pig. Extensive use of verbatim text, so there are copyvio issues as well (extending to at least one of the images). I don't see anything savlageable; I tried to edit it down, but found th task hopeless. Neded to start with a clean slate. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 15:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Peacock Template

I added the peacock template to this article. This article sounds like it was written either by the subject of the article or their "talent" agency. Sentences like "She sings in six languages...", "Her renditions of Donna Summer..." are not very encyclopedic. I question the numerous entries where she appears on talk shows should be included. The entire section "Partial List of Performing Arts Centers, Casinos, Theaters, Night Clubs" suffers from notability issues. Furthermore after further review, I question every edit made by "Mewprod" (other then the spelling mistake corrections) as having a probable COI. I have since removed "Television Credits" and "Partial List.." as direct copies of [1], thus WP:COPYVIO. Marauder40 (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.marilynmichaels.com/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Marauder40 (talk) 19:35, 2 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stubbed

And, nearly five years after I first noticed this article, it's once again a virtually unsourced promotional puff piece. It should stay a stub until it's rebuilt from independent/third party reliable sources. The subject, her publicist, and/or her fan club should not edit the articke until they understand and conform to key Wikipedia policies, particularly WP:BLP. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:56, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

source

funny how none of the fans that edited this article even bothered to list her debut album, which was praised by sammy davis himself. it doesnt prove she is "great" but its a reliable source, as a record company recorded her. even has family info in the liner notes.(mercurysoodrose)50.193.19.66 (talk) 22:51, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mewprod edits

Again Mewprod attempts to re-add the listing of all the appearances Marilyn Michaels has ever done. This listing has multiple problems. As listed above it is directly from her webpage, making it copyrighted material. If you are actually Marilyn Michaels or her talent agent or something similar you should read both the above section that addresses the copyright material and how to resolve the problem and you should read WP:COI regarding conflict of interest. No matter what the listing itself suffers majorly from notability issues. An encyclopedia article does not care for listings every time someone makes the rounds of the talk shows. It also doesn't care about every time someone plays Vegas, Atlantic City or other similar venue. IF you want a list of appearances, this list needs to be trimmed down considerably and can't be a word for word copy of copyrighted material.Marauder40 (talk) 17:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Edit War on This Article

Like myself, fans of Ms. Michaels are no doubt distressed by the petty actions of two Wikipedia users--Marauder40 and Hullaballoo Wolfowitz--who keep undoing my edits to this article. These two users constantly revert my edits with the claim that the article is too Peacock-y, and that it goes into too much depth about Ms. Michaels by detailing her rounds on the talk show circuit. I whole heartedly disagree. I think that her work on the various talk shows is some of the funniest, most impressive work of her career; and it is no small feat to appear on Ed Sullivan and The Tonight Show, let alone perform as well as she did. I hope the two editors who keep changing this article will realize this, and I encourage both of them to consider the possibility that only they, out of the countless editors on Wikipedia, have had any objections to the information on Ms. Michaels posted over the years. I don't know what their beef is with her, or if they have even seen any of her fine performances, but it would be appropriate for them to learn more about her before destroying the information about her on this free online encyclopedia. TheOldestEstablished (talk) 08:17, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First off the only editor that has edit war is you. Reverting edits multiple times without engaging on the talk page is an edit war. I have tried to engage you multiple times on your page. The primary issue you have with your edits is that you have failed to provide third party reliable sources for your edits. Most of the stuff you provide is coming either off her web page or from items like album covers, playbills, etc. all of that fails reliable source. Biographies of living people are held to much higher requirements for reliable sources then other articles. Second take a look at other comedian/impressionist articles, please find one example of an article, especially one that is labelled even a good article that lists every time they appear on a talk show. This isn't IMDB or fan page. I was warning you of this before Hullaballoo Wolfowitz got involved. You ignored this warning. We don't have a "beef" with her. We just need you to edit with Wikipedia guidelines, where reliable sources are needed, notability must be established, and things must be written from a neutral point of view. The edits that have been removed violate one or more of those requirements. As I also said before, if you work for her, her talent agency or her fan clubs you also need to read WP:COI. Marauder40 (talk) 11:13, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again the listing of every time she has appeared on any show has been placed in the article. Nobody except for her, a fan, or her agent care about every time she makes the rounds of the talk show circuit. Look at other comedians and you will not see that in their articles. Usually it is just addressed by a single line saying that she has appeared on shows x, y, and z. Not listing every time they appear on those shows. If you want a TV listing it should be trimmed down considerably. This isn't IMDB or her fan page, although links to either location can be in the article.Marauder40 (talk) 12:07, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the entire section as unsourced and overly detailed. I was not aware of this discussion when I did this. So you can count me as a third (and previously uninvolved) editor who thinks this is overly detailed. There is an external link to IMDB for all those who want to comb through every single TV appearance she has ever made. -- Whpq (talk) 14:07, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see from above I personally did not like the listing that TheOldestEstablished added. It was way to large and way to detailed. Then Cfortunato added the smaller list with just the show names. I figured it was a workable middle-ground, so I started cleaning it up and fixing the list. You can see articles that are both ways, some list ever appearance some don't. Of course the big stars either don't list their talk show appearance at all because there are way to many of them or have separate list type pages which isn't warranted in this case.Marauder40 (talk) 14:19, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If "Hullaballoo Wolfowitz" thinks the article is too "Peacock-y" (whatever exactly that means - it seems to be a rather vague term), then it is incumbent upon him to be specific, and make changes that render the article more neutral. To quote Wikipedia guidelines on dispute resolution: "When you find a passage in an article that is biased, inaccurate, or unsourced the best practice is to improve it if you can rather than deleting salvageable text." Mr Wolfowitz has ignored this guideline, and simply deleted a performer's entire career. That is vandalism. Mr. Wolfowitz has refused to be SPECIFIC about what, exactly his problem is. As far as I can see, the article is reasonable and neutral. There are hardly even any adjectives. It is sourced, and the sources include the Daily News, Backstage, the Boston Globe, Los Angeles Times, Philadelphia Inquirer - all reliable third-party sources. To me, Wolfowitz's edit-warring on this article simply makes no sense at all. Carlo (talk) 13:49, 7 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your inability to make sense of the obvious is your own problem and should not be inflicted on Wikipedia. As the discussions above demonstrate, the article was stubbed by consensus after lengthy efforts to insert false or unverifiable claims, by a now-banned/blocked promotional editor. You remain the only editor who has contested that consensus, and ignore the obvious falsifications and promotional claims in the text you repeatedly restore. Since you show no interest in providing verifiable encyclopedic text with sound sourcing, you shouldn't be editing this, or any other, BLP. So stop. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. (talk) 13:47, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. One example: "In 1965, after signing with ABC Paramount and starring at New York’s Copacabana,[9][10][11] as well as Las Vegas and London, Marilyn starred for a year as Fanny Brice in the National Company of Funny Girl.[12][13][14]" Is that factual? Yes. It is notable? Yes. Is it sourced? Yes. So why do you keep deleting it? Be specific. As for the discussion above, it is related entirely to the Appearances section, which was fixed, per consensus. There is NO "consensus" for you to blank the subject's entire career, that was your own unilateral pronouncement, and doing so violates Wiki guidelines.Carlo (talk) 01:40, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]