Talk:The Latham Diaries

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 The Latham Diaries is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as start-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian politics.
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian literature.
Assessment comments
Books Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

[edit] Book quotes

I have again removed the book quotes from the article, as there is no reason why they need to be included in an encyclopedic entry. At present, the article is far too much like a book review, with a substantial blurb and extracts, but only a few lines on facts (ie. book details, publishing, response, context of the book). This should not read like a summary of the book, and the quotes do not add to the encyclopedic value of the article. I ask that Grant65 does not re-include these extracts until some discussion has occurred. Thanks. Harro5 20:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

  • In looking at the version of 1 March, I support User:Harro5's views. The quotes are gratuitous. The present version seems appropriate for an encyclopaedia article at present.--A Y Arktos 21:13, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem with the criticisms that the article is too much like a book review or does not contain enough facts. But a Quotations section addresses this, by illustrating and exemplifying the themes and character of an author or book. This is particularly important with a book as controversial as this one. Many Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedias do this. See, for example, the "Quotations" section of the George Bernard Shaw article. Or is it just that we are a bit squeamish about Latham's content/turn of phrase? Grant65 | Talk 23:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Latham's turn of phrase is already dealt with in the Beazley quote. Note the second quote is actually somebody quoting Rosemary Crowley to Latham - a bit third hand perhaps. Additional quotes are out of proportion to the rest of the article at present. Perhaps more info on the controversy generated by publication would be more useful and balanced.--A Y Arktos 23:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
There is a significant difference between Shaw and Latham! At the very least, pick memorable quotes - for example, if the article was about Keating, you would probably include a reference to the Banana republic or The recession we had to have. There may of course not be any memorable Latham quotes reflecting several years later. At one stage he made an inane comment about "Bling:" which seemed to demonstrate he didn't know what he meant. There was also the time he called Janet Albrechtson a "skanky ho" or something similar.--A Y Arktos 23:35, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Here is a link to the bling bling reference if anyone wishes to follow up. I haven't got Latham's book - no idea if there is a relevent quote or even if anyone wish to draw this out.--A Y Arktos 23:43, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't think anyone would argue that The Latham Diaries are on a par with Shaw's best. But Wikipedia is not supposed to be about value judgements anyway. I take the point about Crowley, but it is, IMO, a very funny quote and worth including on that basis alone. The other quote that Harro removed was about Latham's political philosophy, and is highly relevant, IMO. Grant65 | Talk 23:46, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Relevant quote reincluded, but other quotes should be encyclopaedic and relevant - yes that is a value judgement - but Latham has had plenty of airplay elsewhere. Also the quotes need some context, since they are apparently not good enough to stand on their own.--A Y Arktos 23:55, 1 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Books/Non-fiction article

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Latham diaries.gif

Image:Latham diaries.gif 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 ensure 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)