Talk:Robie Macauley

	Biography portal 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 supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Michigan Low‑importance

	Michigan portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

amazon[edit]

I will remove the links to amazon.com again - unless someone provides a compelling reason why amazon should be favored over all other bookshops on the whole wide web. just type in the ISBN number, and mediawiki will create a link to Special:BookSources, where you are free to choose your bookseller (or, even better, library catalogue). --Janneman (talk) 13:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Writer's Importance/Notability?[edit]

This article has been created by and most entirely written by a relative of Robie Macauley's. That makes the existence of the article questionable at best. Is anyone, aside from Macauley's relative C. Macauley, familiar with Robie Macauley's work? From what I can tell, nothing that he wrote is still in print. He might indeed be significant, but I wanted to ask, does anyone, outside of Macauley's family, know if Macauley's work is significant enough to warrant a Wikipedia article? No offense to the Macauley family, but it is an important question to ask.Jpcohen (talk) 07:19, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Technique in Fiction is still in print and is widely used as a university textbook. You should be able to tell from reading the article how notable this person is. The article was created by other people, not me, and is very well referenced, indicating that there is abundant evidence for his notability. Are you suggesting that the article be deleted? Cmacauley (talk) 13:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I stand corrected then. No, I don't think the article should be deleted (as long as the author's work is notable). You've clearly put a great deal of hard work into the article, but I would be careful about potential COI when editing this article or other articles on individuals related to you (though I'm sure you're already aware of this).Jpcohen (talk) 11:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that I still think that the case for Robie Macauley's notability/importance as a writer would be significantly stronger if there were affirmative comments from editors who are not related to Robie Macauley.Jpcohen (talk) 11:39, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I am aware of the COI issue, however I happen to be the foremost authority on this man's life, and I felt that it was acceptable in this case for me to contribute my knowledge to Wikipedia. It seems wrong to me to discount my contributions just because we have the same surname. The article does not glorify Robie Macauley inappropriately and, as I noted above, is clearly and extensively referenced. Cmacauley (talk) 11:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to the COI issue, you should probably not edit the Leonard Cohen article any more, since you are clearly related to him. Cmacauley (talk) 17:03, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very funny. Actually I wish I was related to Leonard Cohen.Jpcohen (talk) 00:44, 7 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:EL[edit]

WP:EL states, "Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia (external links), but they should not normally be placed in the body of an article." This [1] edit, removing an external link that had been placed in the body of the article, was thus obviously in accord with WP:EL. It should not have been reverted, as Cmacauley did here. The edit summary used in the revert, "Not clear how this violates WP:EL", made no sense; the link of course violates WP:EL given that external links aren't normally placed in the body of the article. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Robie with Flannery 1947.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]