This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Wednesday Martin article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
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 sourcedmust 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.
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 within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan 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.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan articles
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.
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
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
Hi again! I have a quick request regarding the recently added mention of Untrue, Wednesday's latest book. Would it be possible to adjust the sentence to reflect that the book has
now been released? I'd suggest removing "slated to be" from the sentence:
The book was slated to be released in September 2018. Done
Also, Wednesday has provided a new photo, which I've uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and she has confirmed the release under an appropriate free license:
File:Wednesday_Martin_2018.png Would it be possible to update the infobox with this more recent profile image? Done
Since I have a financial conflict of interest here, as I'm making this request on behalf of Wednesday Martin as part of my work with Beutler Ink, I won't make any changes to the article myself and am looking for an uninvolved editor to review and update the article. Thanks in advance!
16912 Rhiannon (
Talk ·
COI)
03:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)reply
@
16912 Rhiannon: Done. As for your request in the above section, there's a lot of overlap between what she writes about and what she commentates on, so I decided to combine the two of them together. The wording seems to imply some of the categories that don't overlap, she writes/commentates, but it's the closest to a compromise for now since I don't want redundant wording.
Zappa⚡Mati03:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)reply
Thank you so much,
ZappaOMati, all the changes look good to me! Also, I saw the question below re: Wednesday's middle name and I'm not sure off the top of my head or taking a quick peek at sourcing, so I'll ask and come back with that.
16912 Rhiannon (
Talk ·
COI)
21:48, 15 October 2018 (UTC)reply
This
edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
Hi again! Since the release of Untrue there have been several reviews published by various publications, and I'd like to suggest an update to add a brief mention of the most high-profile reviews. As I've mentioned previously, I have a financial conflict of interest, since I'm making this request on behalf of Wednesday Martin as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Due to that, I won't make any direct edits to the article and I'm hoping an editor can review the following suggested addition for the Reception section and make this change if it looks good.
My suggested addition is as follows:
Martin's third book, Untrue, received reviews from multiple publications including The Guardian,[1] the London Evening Standard,[2]The Atlantic,[3] and The New York Times.[4]
Sorry, some unexpected work came in and took over my life. All done now, and I promise I'll make the edits tomorrow morning (Thursday).
JezGrove (
talk)
21:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)reply
This
edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
Hi, editors!
WurmWoode's
recent edit says Wednesday Martin was born in 1966. She was actually born in 1965. Because the source does not specify the year, I would suggest we tweak the text to say she was born in "1965 or 1966", per The New York Times. Other options are to simply remove "in 1966" altogether, or use
Template:Birth based on age as of date since the source only states her age at the time of publication. Thank you for reviewing this request and updating the article on my behalf.
Inkian Jason (
talk)
17:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)reply
Hi, again! I'd like to propose removing the following content:
On June 7, 2015, the New York Post published its investigative article "Upper East Side housewife’s tell-all book is full of lies", in which they pointed out multiple factual discrepancies with Martin's memoirs as published in Primates of Park Avenue.[1] Responding the next day,
Simon & Schuster promised to add a disclaimer to the book, warning that the narrative in the book might not be completely factual.[2]
Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources says, "There is consensus that the New York Post is generally unreliable for factual reporting especially with regard to politics, particularly New York City politics. A tabloid newspaper, editors criticise its lack of concern for fact-checking or corrections, including a number of examples of outright fabrication. Editors consider the New York Post more reliable in the period before it changed ownership in 1976..."
@
David Gerard @
Pburka Thank you for replacing the bad sources with one that's appropriate for Wikipedia. However, the current text is not entirely accurate based on
reporting by The New York Times (the current inline citation). The source says: "On Sunday, after a report that there were factual errors in the book, the publisher, Simon & Schuster, said it would append a note to future editions of the book, written by the social researcher Wednesday Martin, clarifying that some of the memoir's details and chronologies were changed."
Currently, the Wikipedia entry suggests that the New York Post accurately identified factual discrepancies in multiple memoirs written by Martin, which is not true. I propose replacing with the following text, which also clarifies the purpose of the note and its author (Martin):
In 2015, the New York Post claimed to have found multiple factual discrepancies with Martin's memoir Primates of Park Avenue. In response,
Simon & Schuster promised to add a note by Martin to subsequent editions of the book, clarifying that some chronologies and details were changed.
Would you please consider updating the article's text to reflect what the source says?