Talk:Folio Society
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Membership
The article says "A member simply has to buy four Folio Society books each year.", but according to http://www.foliosociety.com/aboutus/how_to_join.php there is no yearly requirement: "Joining us involves buying just four books, after that you can buy as many, or as few, as you wish." Does someone know if there is a yearly requirement? -- Pseudovector Tue Jul 4 22:38:21 UTC 2006
I've been a Folio member for several years. I have been required to purchase 4 books every year in order to maintain membership.138.162.128.55 16:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Authorship
Was this written by the Folio Society, or just a very satisfied member?
The user who originally wrote this (Marksroc) has only this page listed in his list of user contributions. Make your own conclusions. Goffrie 17:11, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Advertisement
This article is an advertisement. Which is a shame because I came here looking for NPOV encyclopedic info, not a sales pitch (I already know FS makes good books). I've tagged it with Template:Advert for now. I would edit it, but no nothing about the company. -- Stbalbach 05:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] New Text
I have today added a completely new text for this article, replacing the text that was rightly considered to be an advertisement. I am a member of The Folio Society but am not otherwise connected with it. With regard to the earlier query, I understand that one is indeed required to purchase four volumes per year of membership, and my text reflects this understanding.
I have retained the illustrations from the original entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sordel (talk • contribs) .
- Thank You, Sordel! Much better, well done, a great addition. -- Stbalbach 21:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Partisan Editing?
My redaction of this page was altered by an unnamed editor to remove the following comment: "At the same time, [Folio] has progressively undermined the value of many of its books in the second-hand market by a combination of discounting and reprinting, suggesting a publisher that is attempting to reinvent itself in a difficult marketplace." The rapid decrease in resale value of recent Folio titles is an observable fact and I have heard booksellers comment on it. Furthermore, this erosion of value is clearly driven by two conscious strategies on Folio's part: namely the reprinting of existing editions and the frequent offer of existing boxed sets at a negligible cost to rejoining members. It seems to me that mention of this phenomenon is relevant to an article on a publisher and does not fall into the area of unfair editorial comment ... but equally I can see why someone connected with Folio might want to remove mention of it. In any case, I have not reverted the edit, but am leaving this comment for those who check the discussion. Given that a previous redaction of this page was marked as an advertisement, I will raise this page as a possible target of partisan editing if further alterations of this sort are made. --Sordel 09:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know who removed it, but I didn't contest the removal of it, and I have no connection to the company. It does sound and read like original research POV. If you want to re-add it, suggest using sources and simply document what other people have said. -- Stbalbach 16:02, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:LPS 1.jpg
Image:LPS 1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:WNDB.jpg
Image:WNDB.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
