Talk:Self-publishing
This article is somewhat POV at present, I've self-published my own stuff and whilst I may not be JK Rowlings I've steadily sold to an audience in the vegan and permaculture markets (and not even used wiki for publicity ends!)- theres more to self publishing than 'vanity presses' (like not wanting to be beholden to any sort of editorial control) and I resent the insinuation that one can either by 'published' or self deluded. for me self publishing represents a 'third way', I can be creatively free, make a modest income, and spend my evenings in ways that are more stimuklating than watching Eastenders ... here's my webshite, make up your own minds; [1] (oops what was that about not using wiki for self promotion???) quercus robur 01:15, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)
- 207.44.148.201 was User:Jstanley01 who forgot to log in. With the advent of personal computers and the internet, the 'third way' you talk about has become much more viable than in the olden days of typewriters and photocopy machines. Just look at what the 'third way' is doing to the music industry. That said, looking at self-publishing as a whole, I believe your success still represents a statistically-rate exception.
- As far as POV, if it ain't NPOV, correct it. That's what Wikipedia is all about. Recognize, though, that writing about a subject with a perfectly NPOV can appear to have a biased POV to someone with a stake in the subject. ô¿ô 01:37, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
- Good job on the changes. ô¿ô 02:10, Aug 2, 2003 (UTC)
This article fails to note the prevalance of self-publishing in the past. In former centuries, the first edition of many books that are now regarded as "classics" were self-published. --Daniel C. Boyer 16:13, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)