Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gilbert and Sullivan/Marc Shepherd's Gilbert and Sullivan Discography

Independent sources

I've added this to WP:FCDW/June 23, 2008, due to be published at the end of the week, but I'm unsure if I'll leave it in because this page is still weak and may mislead. See:

Wikipedia:Independent sources

I'm concerned still about some of the circular reasoning here, and that some of the justifications given would be better deleted, as they aren't independent sources. Using Shepherd himself to justify Shepherd's reliability is a problem, and I don't want to give the wrong impression to Wiki's wider readership. I hope you will consider deleting anything that isn't strictly independent as described on that page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Sandy, do you agree with Shoe that what he removed from the article (shown below) is the evidence that you found circular? Or was it something else? Does that complete the exercise as far as you are concerned? -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

It's certainly in fine shape, and provides a good example for the Dispatch. I would probably delete 4 (movie consultant) as less than relevant, and I'm not sure if 5 satisfies the independent (third-party) criterion (since he's on the editorial board, is it third-party? see WP:Independent sources), but I'm not going to worry. If you're inclined to remove those two, you've still built a case. Remember for future FACs, though, anything that you can source to a non-WP:SPS would be stronger. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

OK. The fact that he sits on the editorial board is just an acknowledgement that he is an editor of a volume. The publisher has the final say as to what will be published. Should I remove the statement that he sits on the Editorial Board? I agree that it does not add anything to the argument. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:29, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Possible addition?

Would it be helpful to add this?: Classical Net "The Internet's Premier Classical Music Source" says, in reviewing one of the recordings that Marc provided liner notes for: "The annotations are by Marc Shepherd, whose excellent G&S discography on the Internet is required reading for anyone who has gotten this far in my review!" -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

As long as you add it to the part that tells us why the author of classical.net is reliable. You know, we don't need to write an article about this guy; we just need enough to establish that WP:SPS is met :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Minor edit question

WP:PUNC says: "Correct: Arthur said, "The situation is deplorable." (The period is part of the quoted text.) So, I think the period should go inside the quotes. Or am I misreading WP:PUNC? -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not good at logical quotation; if I got it wrong, revert me. (I'll probably forget, though :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, will do. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:33, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Evidence ommitted from project page

This is the evidence that I [Shoemaker] think is most likely to confuse the non-G&S afficianado.

1. Shepherd has written articles about Gilbert and Sullivan published in Oxford University Press's journal of musical scholarship, Music & Letters. He has also had articles published in numerous G&S journals including "The Gilbert and Sullivan News" (the official journal of the Gilbert and Sullivan Society, London, which is distributed to Gilbert and Sullivan fans worldwide), GASBAG (which has an editorial board and is the second most widely-read G&S newsletter, after "The Gilbert and Sullivan News"), The Palace Peeper (the monthly newsletter of the G&S Society of NY), and The Trumpet Bray (the monthly newsletter of NEGASS, New England Gilbert and Sullivan Society). Shepherd is also a contributor the The Gilbert and Sullivan Archive. See, for example, this contribution and this one.
2. Other G&S scholars have praised the quality of Shepherd's articles. In their article on reconstructing the lost G&S opera Thespis, G&S scholars Selwyn and Tillett refer to a 1999 article by Shepherd: "The history of the writing and earliest performances of Pirates is quite complicated enough without our adding to it. To see it set out with astonishing clarity, one needs to read Marc Shepherd’s article 'Climbing over rocky mountain – the Happy Accident that Wasn't'. This is a masterful summary and discussion of all the conflicting evidence that has been adduced over many years."
3. Shepherd is acknowledged in this article.
4. Classical Net "The Internet's Premier Classical Music Source" says, in reviewing one of the recordings that Marc provided liner notes for: "The annotations are by Marc Shepherd, whose excellent G&S discography on the Internet is required reading for anyone who has gotten this far in my review!"