Talk:Bat for Lashes plays the Bowery Ballroom: an Interview with Natasha Khan
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
NPOV[edit]
Wikinews should not be asking questions like DS: Is it difficult to come to the United States to play considering all the wars we start? That is a violation of NPOV. --SVTCobra 09:55, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- NPOV is inapplicable in an interview - we can ask any question we would like. And that's your opinion it's a violation, regardless. Is your argument this: "The implication is that it would be difficult to come to the United States because war is bad, and he is implying people don't like war, and that a country that has started two wars might not be liked by an artist who talks about peace! This is a violation of NPOV!" Please... This isn't an encyclopedia, it's an interview. --David Shankbone 11:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- You need to ask such questions in a less leading manner like: WN: Have the recent wars influenced your decision to come to the United States? "considering all the we wars we start" why not ask "considering Bush is the devil and Hitler incarnate". You cannot ask any question you like if you are going to make POV statements in them. I don't know where you got that idea. --SVTCobra 12:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- That's preposterous. Under that theory, this question would have been problematic: "You are often compared to Björk and Kate Bush; do those constant comparisons tend to bother you as an artist who is trying to define herself on her own terms?" If anyone takes time to research an interviewee, they walk in knowing certain things about that person, and they gear their questions in that way so that we don't reinvent the wheel in every interview and ask the same boring, staid questions when we have new ones that build on earlier interviews or statements of the subject. --David Shankbone 12:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- This question was ok because you correctly attributed the opinion to others. --SVTCobra 13:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- What does knowing something about the interviewee have to do with stating all the wars we start? Is it that you know she talks about peace and you hoped you could get her to say something controversial if you asked a leading question? But if you want to look at the rest of your article your opening paragraph is a veritable love-fest and not exactly neutral either.--SVTCobra 13:02, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- It's an interview, not a news article. And finding a criticism of this band was virtually impossible, and unnecessary. You are confusing writing a news piece culled from sources or reporting on a happening with sitting down with a person and discussing their work, where NPOV does not come into play. --David Shankbone 13:08, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- And you are confusing an interview with pulpit from which you can espouse you own personal political views. You don't get to hide from NPOV behind an interview. All I am saying is phrase your questions neutrally. The interviewee on the other hand can say whatever she/he feels like. --SVTCobra 13:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, I think I see your point. It wasn't meant in a pulpit sort of way. The publicist had come on the line to end the interview, and I was one question over my limit when she tried to cut it off, so it was inartfully worded. I see your point. --David Shankbone 13:53, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- And you are confusing an interview with pulpit from which you can espouse you own personal political views. You don't get to hide from NPOV behind an interview. All I am saying is phrase your questions neutrally. The interviewee on the other hand can say whatever she/he feels like. --SVTCobra 13:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- It's an interview, not a news article. And finding a criticism of this band was virtually impossible, and unnecessary. You are confusing writing a news piece culled from sources or reporting on a happening with sitting down with a person and discussing their work, where NPOV does not come into play. --David Shankbone 13:08, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- That's preposterous. Under that theory, this question would have been problematic: "You are often compared to Björk and Kate Bush; do those constant comparisons tend to bother you as an artist who is trying to define herself on her own terms?" If anyone takes time to research an interviewee, they walk in knowing certain things about that person, and they gear their questions in that way so that we don't reinvent the wheel in every interview and ask the same boring, staid questions when we have new ones that build on earlier interviews or statements of the subject. --David Shankbone 12:52, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- You need to ask such questions in a less leading manner like: WN: Have the recent wars influenced your decision to come to the United States? "considering all the we wars we start" why not ask "considering Bush is the devil and Hitler incarnate". You cannot ask any question you like if you are going to make POV statements in them. I don't know where you got that idea. --SVTCobra 12:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Good subject[edit]
I'd just like to note, "wow". This lady was the second lead story in the local alt entertainment paper, I'm amazed to see her in here too. -- Zanimum 19:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- And I must say "wow". Dav is a lucky chap. 8) — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 11:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Typo[edit]
{{editprotected}}
'their their' => [sic] should be added I guess; or the quote is incorrect in which case there should be only one 'their'. Van der Hoorn (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
Done — It really depends on the interview. This guy often does his interview live, so his errors are usually caused during transcription of the audio. When it is a text based interview it would need a [sic], cause then it would be the person themselves making the error, not us. Gopher65talk 02:41, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
