Talk:Khmer classical dance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] More sources
If anyone can provide more sources, that would be great. This article is okay I think. While I don't doubt the statements made here, they cannot all be verified yet. So we need to find more sources to verify them. --Hecktor 10:34, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
- I added a source or two as well as some direct quotes from other sites. Trilinguist 18:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Removing link to Earth in Flower...
This website has a very good amount of pictures. However, I felt that whoever inserted that link may have done that to bring attention to the book (that hasn't been even released yet). And the website's main purpose is to sell a book, so I am removing it. I did, however, added a link to the Earth in Flower article under 'See Also.' --Dara (talk) 11:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Dear Dara, You are doing a wonderful job revising the Khmer Classical Dance page, however you do a huge disservice to Cambodia, Cambodian scholarship, and Cambodian dance in your attempt to block access to Earth in Flower and its related information. Note that I did personally assist in editing and publishing the book. I have replied to you on the talk page of that article and am doing so again here. Let me address the points you raise above directly:
"to bring attention to the book (that hasn't been even released yet)"
In fact, it is to bring attention to knowledge about Cambodian dance that is again available after much of has been unavailable since 1975. The book will be released in May, however we made important academic information from the book available to scholars as soon as possible (table of contents, index, every photo and diagram in the book, the full bibliography).
"the website's main purpose is to sell a book"
The website offers the book along with a number of free resources - more resources than many of the other websites you include (many of which are also trying to raise money to survive). By the way, if you think printing an obscure academic title on Cambodian dance is done for profit...well, we need to talk!
We could only afford to print 880 copies of the book. Most are slated for to college and university libraries and many will be donated. Proceeds, if any, will go to perpetuate Cambodian dance through scholarships and subsidizing costume costs. The sale of the book does not alter access to the free info.
"website's main purpose is to sell a book, so I am removing it."
The website that you arbitrarily removed contains the MOST comprehensive, well organized FREE collection of Cambodian dance photos on the Internet. The free bibliography, table of contents and index have no academic equal for Cambodian dance research on OR off the Internet. Finally, the link page offers some of the best online resources promoting Cambodian dance and culture. Anyone interested in Cambodian dance will gain a lot from this free resource, without buying anything.
Added note on references from Earth in Flower - Please do download a free copy of the table of contents, index and especially the bibliography. I submit that you will find this information vital in establishing historical verification and sources for this Wiki topic. Every major book or study of Cambodian dance since 1975 cites Earth in Flower for a reason: it is the most comprehensive study of Cambodian dance ever undertaken. The fact that this knowledge has been virtually unavailable to the world is what drove me to publish it. The scholarship is solid and it provides an essential contribution to Cambodia's history.
I respect your concern to keep Wikipedia non-commercial, however I believe you need to take a much closer looks at the facts in this situation. I am interested in your thoughts and would like to hear opinions from other dance students and scholars about your decision to attempt to eliminate this source of information.
Kent Davis DatASIA (talk) 16:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] A reminder on citation...
Remember people, when making a citation, please do it properly! There is no one standard way to cite, but try to conform to what the article already uses. Which is the Harvard style. Please see the Shortened notes section at WP:REF for more information on how to do it. Thanks for your cooperation. Also, try to give some explanation in the footnotes (I have not done so yet for the sources I've cited, but I am getting to it). --Dara (talk) 09:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)