The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
Keep the main article; merge the others; I rely on Cunard or Arxiloxos or I, JethroBT or one of the others supporting the merge to do so. As the other will become redirects, no deletions are necessary. , 30 December 2014 (UTC), see discussion.
Sweethearts (book) was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 7 November 2017 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Sharon Rich. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Jeanette MacDonald Autobiography was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 31 January 2015 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Sharon Rich. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Nelson Eddy: The Opera Years was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 31 January 2015 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Sharon Rich. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Mac/Eddy Today was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 31 January 2015 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Sharon Rich. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sharon Rich article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
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
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
Copying below from my Talk Page as is specific to this article..
I am a new Wikipedia contributor and have done the main tutorials and introductions and read the protocols and conventions carefully.
Looking at the many contributions you have made I am in awe as to how you do it. I see you have been given many accolades and that is what I will aspire to.
But I digress.
The purpose of communicating with you is to get your feedback on what constitutes worthwhile additions and what doesn’t.
I have a good friend in Florida who happens to be a neighbor of Sharon Rich, the author. I mentioned to her that I had become a contributor to Wikipedia and she told me that Sharon had both her own website and a Wikipedia article but was most upset at what had occurred to her.
She believes that additions had been added to her Wikipedia article which were not relevant to her. She just wanted a simple page that has similar content to that on her website.
I said I would have a look at it for her and I saw what she meant.
Could I call upon your kind consideration to give me permission to delete those parts that are causing her distress?
Bzcons44 (talk) 23:56, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bzcons44. On Wikipedia, nobody owns an article, not the subject, not me, nobody. What Sharon "wants" is not something that Wikipedia takes into account in deciding what goes into an article. Wikipedia is not a brochure (per WP:NOTBROCHURE) or somebody's facebook page (per WP:NOTFACEBOOK).
Articles regarding living persons are governed by WP:BLP. Content must come from reliable independent secondary sources (per WP:RS). If content about an individual is freely verifiable from reliable sources, we could not have a situation where Wikipedia could not cover such content – why would readers come to Wikipedia to read an inferior or redacted version of what was known about a subject?
.jpg){kind=small}