Talk:Sara Hickman
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Texas, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Texas. |
[edit] NPOV?
This article reads more like a personal puff piece than a serious encyclopedia entry. The writer put little objectivity in statements like, Sara is "considered an angel by her ardent fans," or "Sara Hickman fans generally regard her as an inspiration to artists, humanitarians, and mothers everywhere." Why would encyclopedia readers care if Sara, continues "enjoy her husband and two beautiful daughters?" If you read any of this stuff in a newspaper, you would immediately consider it biased, the standard should be higher in Wikipedia.
Now much improved, thank you MisterHand. SteveHopson 00:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] NPOV of Aesthetic Opinions for Artists and Musicians
I agree that your edits are succinct and appear objective, but they lack the playfulness and sparkle that is clearly present in Sara Hickman's music that her fans have come to enjoy over the last 20+ years that she has been performing publicly. Granted it is certainly important to be objective when describing a subject in an encyclopedia. However, to only write completely objective statements about the body of work of an artist or a musician or a playwright would be a disservice to readers trying to get a good understanding of this person's work.
One could be totally objective and say that "the greater part of "Romeo and Juliet" is written in iambic pentameter", but without adding that it is "the most famous of <Shakespeare's> plays and undoubtedly the most famous love story in Western history" makes it seem about as interesting as a lump of coal. In fact, Wikipedia's criteria for NPOV points out that expressing aesthetic opinions about artists and musicians is a special case where "it may be important to describe how some artist or some work has been received by the general public or by prominent experts. Providing an overview of the common interpretations of a creative work ... is appropriate." Wikipedia further states, "how some artist or work has been received publicly or critically ... is an opinion that really matters."
In this case, one only needs to read the critical reviews about Sara Hickman's music or peruse the statements from her fans on her Yahoo Group to verify statements like, Sara is "considered an angel by her ardent fans," or "Sara Hickman fans generally regard her as an inspiration to artists, humanitarians, and mothers everywhere." Granted these statements sound mushy and biased with seemingly little objectivity, but that's the way Sara Hickman's fans are. These are the same fans that in the mid-90's sent in fifty thousand dollars to buy back Sara's recording masters from Electra Records so the album could still be released after Electra chose to kill the project. It would also be these types of encyclopedia readers that might want to take their family to see her live that would care if Sara, continues to "enjoy her husband and two beautiful daughters."
I'm not so naive to think that everyone that reads this Wikipedia entry or listens to Sara Hickman's music is going to like her work, but I do think that without including some amount of subjectivity about what the public says about it could turn off someone who might otherwise like to listen to it.
You deserve praise for improving the structure and flow of this article, but do you think you could accomodate some subjectivity to avoid it leaving a dry taste in the readers mouth like they've just chewed on a ball of cotton?
Thanks for your continued persuit to improve Wikipedia, Bakerjw 06:26, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
