Talk:June Preston

message: Perhaps the Media History Digital Library will be useful. Here's the Motion Picture Herald, listing June Preston in the role of Mrs. Bluett's daughter in Anne of Green Gables, [RKO] Radio [Pictures], Oct 26, 1934. 
: Brief comment: June Preston has been given a contract by RKO, The Film Daily, Jan-Mar 1935
: Here's an interesting one: last column of right hand page, Bad-Check Impresario Lands US Opera Troupe in Colombia Hot Water, Variety, July 1952, Bogota. To summarise, a group of opera stars from the Met (one of whom features on the flier for La Boheme that we have a snipping of) were on a tour of Colombia, when an Argentinian named Gregorio Ravic, who was paying their wages, was arrested for checks that bounced. The takings vanished, nobody got their salary, and the stars had to be rescued on a special plane because they couldn't pay their own way home. "Ravic is married to June Preston, soprano from St. Louis, who appeared in several performances here". 
: Which name leads only to more intrigue: Panama American, January 22, 1952 Advert, bottom of page 5: GALA CONCERT!! National Symphony Orchestra GUEST CONDUCTOR Gregorio Ravic Director of Buenos Aires Symphony Orchestra SOLOIST: JUNE PRESTON Renowned North American Soprano, followed the next day Wednesday January 23, 1952, by a note on the front page: Mystery Maestro - Gregorio Ravic, billed as Director of the Buenos Aires Symphony Orchestra, is to conduct the Panama National Symphony Orchestra [...] From the Buenos Aires bureau of United Press today came this message: "Both city-owned Teatro Colon and private music circles here have never heard of Ravic". I suppose the simple answer is that this charlatan also made up the whole thing about being married to June Preston.  Card Zero  (talk) 00:56, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hunting for sources 

message: Is the Anne of Green Gables role even a speaking role? The character doesn't even have a name (the credits only call the character "The Blewett Little Girl"). No mention of her or even Mrs. Blewett in the standard film plot, or even in the lengthy plot plus characters information in the Wikipedia article on the novel: Anne of Green Gables. Does she have any lines? I probably saw the 1934 movie at some point in my life but I certainly can't recall any details at this point. Softlavender (talk) 01:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the ''Anne of Green Gables'' role even a speaking role? 

message: No one has yet demonstrated that this article subject has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Until that is demonstrated, the notability tag needs to remain on the article per Help:Maintenance template removal. As a courtesy, we are waiting a week or two to see if editors can dig up significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject (after that, it will probably go to AFD). But it's fairly clear that neither her career as a child actress (almost exclusively in uncredited parts in film shorts) nor her career as an adult soprano (almost exclusively in a falsely advertised tour of Latin America and a few appearances in Europe, plus a few local or regional appearances in the U.S.) rise to the level of Wikipedia notability, even combined with each other. Softlavender (talk) 09:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: (I just ran into this when researching the frocks.)
https://www.astro.com/astro-databank/Preston,_June
Astrodatabank's researcher is in possession of (a valid photocopy of) Preston's birth certificate, and it matches what her daughter has claimed all along (honestly, that's one thing the daughter has no motive or cause to lie about). I suggest if we are going to include birth information, we use that information instead of the absurdly varied information that has been reported in various different newspapers. Wiki user  is co-owner/co-creator of Astrodatabank and its parent site, and can confirm that they don't claim possession of birth certificate unless they actually have it in hand. (Can ignore the biography, which they don't factcheck or cite, but they do scrupulously verify birth information.) Softlavender (talk) 11:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth certificate and birth date/place 

message: I found this article and am not clear on if this is Preston or not. If it is, then we not only get a middle name, but also fill in some of the time gap in between the acting and singing career phases. SilverserenC 18:41, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this her? 

message: , I think the summary of the Ninth Symphony review is confusing and distorts the meaning of the original article. You wrote, “Reviewer Thomas B. Sherman criticized the composer who put together the Ninth Symphony performance for forcing Preston as the soprano into a "cruel range" that was impossible for any singer to reach without screaming at points.” This makes it sound like Beethoven was alive and actively put together this particular performance of his symphony. The composer in question, Beethoven, died in 1827. Beethoven did not “put together” this specific performance of his Ninth Symphony, nor was the work altered to be higher for this specific performance (that would be sacrilege in the classical music world). Preston was hired to sing a well known masterwork as written by a dead composer. She clearly struggled to perform well, and the reviewer was blaming Beethoven’s writing for the soprano voice as the reason. However, I would point out that this is a very well known frequently performed work with many recording that do not have screaming sopranos, so I am not sure this is a fair assessment of the symphony or Beethoven’s skill writing for the soprano voice, but one particular reviewers reaction to hearing the work not performed well.4meter4 (talk) 19:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You are clearly trying to present what the source said in your own opinion. Your own opinion on the work and its ability to be sung has nothing to do with what reliable sources say. The reviewer was criticizing the composer of this particular performance in specific, not Beethoven, so feel free to reword to make that clear, but the rest of your comment is nonsense. The reviewer was blatantly clear that the composer of this performance did a poor job setting it up and any claims of Preston just not performing it well is OR on your part. Your opinion on whether the reviewer had a "fair assessment of the symphony" is again, your opinion, and an editor's opinion on what a reliable source said is irrelevant to article writing. I'm not sure why you're so determined to write things in a manner to make the article subject look bad. SilverserenC 19:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you misread and misunderstood the article. There is no composer other than Beethoven.4meter4 (talk) 19:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, you're right, he was referring to Beethoven and not the conductor. So you are just mad at the fact that the author criticized Beethoven and you disagree with the author? SilverserenC 19:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I just think that the review should be presented in appropriate context and without confusing the living and the dead. Best.4meter4 (talk) 19:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

text:  I support 4meter4's view. The reviewer said that she screamed, and blamed Beethoven. Other singers, however, are able to perform the part without screaming. I looks as if just Preston wasn't up to it. The wording presently in the article is misleading. I'd use the ref for the fact that she sang, but would mercifully drop analysis of what was written about her performance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:40, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What part is misleading exactly? Misleading about what? It honestly just sounds like you disagree with the reviewer. Either way, I'm fine with reducing the analysis of her performance, still a useful bit of news coverage regardless. SilverserenC 19:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I think what G. Arendt says is right. The present article gives too much emphasis to the views of one reviewer in a local newspaper. Sherman either didn't know or ignored the fact that countless sopranos have coped in the Ninth mellifluously, and quoting his comment too closely is, I think, WP:UNDUE. The suggestion, above, by G. Arendt seems to me the way to go. – Tim riley talk 19:57, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you  for putting my thoughts into the right policy language. The issue here is the quote is more of a commentary on Beethoven then on Preston, and if we are going to make assertions about a major composer and a major work of music then we should use the best scholarly sources about that work and composer to support those opinions. This particular opinion would be difficult to support with the scholarly literature on Beethoven and  the  Symphony No. 9, and positions a review of a regional orchestra in a local newspaper in central place which gives WP:UNDUEWEIGHT to that source.4meter4 (talk) 20:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beethoven review 

message: * 
Spanish:
English:
-- SilverserenC 22:24, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source transcriptions and translations 

message: I had added a section entitled Merchandising, and wrote about June Preston Frocks. Another editor questioned whether that added to notability, so I thought it possible that the section would evidently be deleted. However, I was surprised when  Innisfree987 deleted it because it was archival research, and at odds with WP:NOR. I based the section on advertisements I found while searching through newspapers.com for information on June Preston. If I had found five articles on films she had appeared in I would not have considered that to be original research, for I would have found the articles in a published source. I found the advertisements in published sources, so I'm not sure why that became archival research.
The section has been deleted, and I will not revert the deletion since it may not have been the best addition to the article. I can understand that a section based on advertisements was problematic, but I'm baffled by the No Original Research reasoning. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi @Karenthewriter, I understand that this part of WP policy is not necessarily intuitive. Not all published sources are equal, even in the same publication. We prioritize secondary sources, i.e. ones where primary material has already been subject to a fact-checking and editorial process filtering for accuracy, significance, etc. We need that because we don’t have the money to pay subject-matter experts to do the filtering. In a newspaper, the articles have been subject to that scrutiny, but advertisements have not, thus they are primary sources and discussion of them is original research. They could be used sparingly to verify a single fact perhaps, but really not to develop a whole section as that makes a claim about significance that comes from your personal interpretation.This is not to say my interpretation would be that the ads are anything but rich and interesting; but our interpretations are excluded by WP:SYNTH and just are not what we do here at WP, so it’s been suggested to the COI editor that she may wish to develop her own website to display them (and maybe even attract the attention of a journalist or scholar who would write them up for a source we could use.) Innisfree987 (talk) 01:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Innisfree987 I will accept what you have stated. However, if I should find a doll reference book that lists a June Preston doll, or if I obtain a published article that tells of June Preston Frocks, or other name-branded items, I will work on obtaining enough non-advertising references to attempt a new merchandising section. But if I add that new section, and it is also deleted, I will accept that as well. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @Karenthewriter, I hope you’re able to find good secondary sources; that would be great. (Note that you need to be a little cautious with books; sometimes one that looks good is actually self-published.) But beyond that should be fine, just keep in mind WP:DUE weight. If the sources turn out to be voluminous, then maybe a section is merited. But right now the whole of her film career is only four sentences so adding another couple of sentences about merchandise might be plenty. Just depends on what you find. Happy hunting! Innisfree987 (talk) 03:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merchandising deleted due to No Original Research 

message: Seems like something that belongs in an article on Ravic, not here. It's relevance is questionable. If the issue is the confusion over the name of the company and the fact that it wasn't actually associated with the Met, then removing both of those lines including the name of the company would avoid that issue entirely and leave an article that actually focuses on Preston in specific. Only the first part saying that she was a member of his company is relevant information for this article. SilverserenC 19:03, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Good trim IMO. Also then points to trying to reconcile bits just before and after—wouldn’t she have been 24 in 1952 (ie is that all the same tour?) Innisfree987 (talk) 19:47, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that her daughter has made inaccurate claims elsewhere online that she sang with the Met on tour in South America and the zarzuela book source also incorrectly makes this assertion, I think it's an important fact that needs to be included if only to prevent the claim from working its way back into the article and to be an accurate source of info against incorrect information about Preston on other websites.4meter4 (talk) 22:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps a footnote? Innisfree987 (talk) 22:09, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like a footnote would be fine. In fact, the two sentence we have now could just be moved to a footnote. SilverserenC 22:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

text: Please be more careful with your editing, . I have the non-English language sources in the section above with their translations. Your claim that one didn't discuss Preston is false. SilverserenC 19:03, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, there is a problem here. The source citation refers to an article entitled 'La boheme in El Liceo'. That article is here and doesn't mention Preston. The link to the source citation is here - that doesn't have the article title claimed, although I now see it may be a continuation of the former (which is not cited). My claim may indeed have been mistaken - (although there was no intention, as you could be taken to imply, that I was intending to be 'false'). If the two sources I mention here are indeed one and the same newspaper article, please edit the WP article to make that clear.--Smerus (talk) 19:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

text: An IP removed the sourced information about the marriage , and left the text unclear as to what company was being referred to, so I added a clarification . From my view, it seems best at this time to not include the detail of the marriage, in part because we generally do not have a lot of sourced biographical information available, and also per WP:NOTGOSSIP, e.g.  This detail does not seem significant enough to include without a source commenting on the significance, or without more developed biographical information available to provide context. Beccaynr (talk) 23:21, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the information about Ravic's company even relevant? 

message: I notice you challenged Preston's studies with Lotte Lehmann. What makes you think this is inaccurate? Lehmann was teaching in California in the late 1940s and early 1950s at the Music Academy of the West in Santa Barbara. Preston was a member of the San Francisco Opera chorus in 1952. Lehmann had a lengthy professional career with the SFO and was closely tied to that company. I personally think its plausible that Preston participated in at a minimum a masterclass(es) with Lehmann given the timeline and geographic overlap. The two women were likely to run across each other through SFO connections in the early 1950s. I think the zarzuela book is likely accurate on this point, although the extent of studies may have been very brief ( i.e. masterclass sessions). Its possible she was a private student as well. Best.4meter4 (talk) 19:22, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: If she attended a masterclass then that scarcely qualifies her as studying under Lehmann. If she was a private student, then some supporting evidence would be necessary to say so. Plausibility is not quite enough for WP, as you will know. Given the other inaccuracies which we know to have studded this article, I don't think the zarzuela book (which also meretriciously claims that Preston debuted at the Met at the age of 24),  can qualify as a reliable source. Best, --Smerus (talk) 19:35, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the zarzuela book has errors but I think easily understood ones. The Spanish language author was clearly going off of Spanish language press articles about Preston, which is why the Met probably ended up into her bio in that book. The tour's organizers were clearly deceptively marketing the tour as connected to the Met, and were able to do so by legally naming the touring opera group "Compañía de Ópera Estrellas del Metropolitan" (Company of Opera Stars of the Metropolitan). They hired Met singers while they were off for the summer which made people think it was an actual Met tour. It's not surprising the press was confused about the tour, and thought it was organized by the Metropolitan Opera, and the tour organizers were happy to keep the press confused to further ticket sales. Catching the deception required looking at English language American press like Variety and Opera News, or a check in the Met's archives. It's doubtful this researcher had access to those sources being outside the USA (and possibly not able to read English), and I can see how the mistake would have been made based on Spanish language newspaper articles. I have no reason to doubt the Lotte Lehmann studies as she was a highly active voice teacher in California with many students in her studio, and would have been exactly the sort of person Preston would have been encouraged to study with while a budding opera singer in San Francisco. Best.4meter4 (talk) 19:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: With the best will in the world, I cannot feel that you (or for that matter I, were that the case) having 'no reason to doubt' LL teaching JP would count as appropriate proof for WP purposes. That's basically WP:OR.What we need is reason to credit, from a reliable secondary source. If the zarzuela book were able to provide a reference, that would perhaps be different - but it doesn't seem to. And as it didn't bother to check the Met reference we can I think have no confidence that it checked on LL. Best, Smerus (talk) 21:17, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

text: ? Doesn't seem to mention Lehmann.--Smerus (talk) 09:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not in regards to that, no, but gives a lot of other useful information, such as studying under maestro Gustav Stern, maestro Edwin McArthur, and composer Martin Kalmanoff (The fact that we're missing an article on Kalmanoff seems a bit disgraceful). So even if we are unable to confirm Lehmann with a different source, we still have other helpful information in the same vein. SilverserenC 09:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Not a reliable (or remotely credible) source for any of the above material. This is not 'information', just appears to be recycled publicity puff, as is much of the 'information' in Latin-American newspapers, Walter Winchell, etc. cited in this article. Can I gently point out that the source is not 'The American Observer' as you mistakenly cite, but 'The Armenian Observer'. The main thing this article indicates is that  JP had sunk so low by 1982 that she was reduced to giving recitals at US Armenian old folks' homes. --Smerus (talk) 10:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. The main trouble here is the quality of the sources. It looks like the publications have not done independent fact checking, and have largely just reprinted information provided by Preston or her agent. I would assume good faith on teachers and training provided by the artist in an article like this normally, but Smerus has convinced me that it probably is not wise. Once we’ve caught one factual error it’s difficult to AGF about anything; particularly without details.4meter4 (talk) 16:48, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but your claimed opinion on independent fact checking is itself without facts. You have literally no evidence outside of a single thing (the company not officially being a part of the Met) that is incorrect. And we already know why that misconception would occur, especially with the name of the company in question. Assuming everything else, including everything about things she did totally unconnected to Ravic, is lies is itself blatant OR. You have absolutely no backing to claim anything else is false. SilverserenC 18:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

text: Honestly, that's kind of the last straw for me. Your attacks on the article subject. You clearly can't be neutral on this subject and shouldn't be editing this article at all. SilverserenC 18:29, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

text: Whereas, of course, your determination to accept anything not clearly falsifiable cannot possibly be construed as WP:OR, and you are in every aspect entirely neutral in your approach to the topic. I completely understand. As we say in Armenian, Երջանիկ կյանք ունեցեք. Best, Smerus (talk) 20:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: So, me following what the reliable source coverage says is OR, but you claiming without evidence that the information is wrong isn't OR? SilverserenC 20:20, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: @  Do we really need to resort to personal attacks? Please be civil. We can have a difference of opinion without needing to be rude to each other. Smerus expressed concern over the reliability of the sources, and I tend to err on the side of caution when other editors object to source quality. You are perfectly able to make a counter argument about why we should accept the sources as reliable. Everyone wants to do what is best for the encyclopedia, and we shouldn’t be sniping at each other.4meter4 (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Then maybe Smerus should stop insulting the subject of the article when you know her daughter is also here reading this talk page? SilverserenC 22:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that more respect could be given in the tone of the conversation. I certainly, began the thread earlier on the talk page rather heated when discussing issues with softlavender (largely in response to the earlier version of the article) but have sense calmed. It’s clear to me the Preston article should be kept at this point, and I think that is largely due to the improvements that you have made. I have also added some good content myself, such as her university education. Let’s keep moving forward with positive energy. I am open to hearing why you think we should accept the content from these sources. You will remember I began this thread questioning the removal of her teacher from the article; so I myself was leaning towards not outright dismissing the sources originally. Best.4meter4 (talk) 22:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

text: @ Nobody is accusing you of lying. This conversation is about this book:  User Smerus is questioning its reliability, and our ability to include its content (such as the studies with  Lotte Lehmann) per the policies at WP:Verifiability. Please understand that wikipedia is not concerned with what is true but what is verifiably true from quality sources. I personally can see a good argument for keeping the info on her teacher, but I also can understand why Smerus is reticent to use the source. Best.4meter4 (talk) 16:11, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lotte Lehmann 

message: In their complaining about me above, User:Silver_seren comments "maybe Smerus should stop insulting the subject of the article when you know her daughter is also here reading this talk page?". This raises a number of issues: amongst them , how can I be expected to know that JP's daughter is reading this page, and, if I did know, why should that impede me, or anyone else, from acting as a disinterested WP editor?
But more interestingly (to me), it raises the question of how Silverseren knows that JP's daughter is reading this talk page? If Silverseren is in contact with JP's daughter, then should they not declare an actual or potential WP:COI? Some clarification here would be helpful.--Smerus (talk) 13:40, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The user (Prestons' daughter), is ; they've declared COI, reached out to the Reference Desk and included the info in this edit summary about a week back. Panini!🥪 17:59, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: (It's also literally pointed out on the top of this talk page in the banner. And she reached out on Wikiproject Women in Red, hence why several of us are here.) SilverserenC 18:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

text: Thanks for this explanation, Panini!. A week ago seems an aeon in this saga. Best, -Smerus (talk) 21:25, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi  It is the nature of Wikipedia policies that the information has to be checked and verified. I understand why your feeling that way. It is unfortunate it is such a long time ago, as I known from experience that the information from that period is patchy at best. We are doing our best. Unfortunately it never works out as you think it will.  scope_creepTalk 11:09, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: COI query

message: This content is cited to Variety with a proper citation including article title and page numbers. It's in the very last sentence of the article on page 11. It states, "Ravic is married to June Preston, soprano from St. Louis, who appeared in several performances here". As such, the content does not fail verification and that tag should not have been placed by .4meter4 (talk) 23:33, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: And yet Idoonie says her mother was never married to Ravic (and he is not her father). Do we have any actual marriage records or any documentation other than that one article's claim at the very end of it? One would think such a marriage of two notable people would have gotten coverage when it occurred, even if in brief (and presumably occurred prior to the company's trip?). SilverserenC 23:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also weird that none of the other coverage of the company's performance trip that Preston went on mentioned such a thing. SilverserenC 23:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I understand that. However, Variety is a widely respected independent publication and the fact is verified. I won't speculate as to why Idoonie's account is different than what a reliable respected published source say. It's possible she is correct, and the source is wrong. It's equally possible that her mother had an earlier marriage and divorce that she doesn't talk about. We don't always know our own family histories. Regardless, this clearly falls under verifiable information, and we shouldn't accept a COI editor's claims over an independent printed source with a good reputation per policy.4meter4 (talk) 23:49, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Except that the information wasn't made by Variety. They possibly may have written it up, but the notation is pretty clear that the actual claimed information came from Bogota. It looks like they independently messaged Lubarsky, but everything else is based off of information from Bogota. And it's also weird that the statement is in the final sentence and it comes out of nowhere and has nothing to do with the information preceding it. Do we have any other evidence or indication anywhere else that it's accurate? SilverserenC 00:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Incorrect. Variety has staff reporters/correspondents in cities globally, and they mention cities when their staff reporter for that city is doing the reporting. The Bogota citation is letting the reader know its coming from the publication's Bogota correspondent.4meter4 (talk) 00:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

text: My mistake: at the top of the same page there is a separate shorter item about Ravic that makes no mention of his marriage and while I looked for where that column might continue, I did not think to look for a second story. In any case like Karenthewriter I’m unwatching now. Godspeed. Innisfree987 (talk) 00:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: What's the source? I couldn't locate it on the Pinterest link. We should add that marriage as well if it's from a reliable publication. Best.4meter4 (talk) 15:25, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: see here...also in her daughter's write up ofJP  in IMDB....but these wouldn't count as WP sources.....--Smerus (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preston's marriage to Ravic 

message: Did you read the Hollywood Reporter obit? THAT is who she was not what is on wiki or do the wiki contributors know more than the Senior Editor at the Hollywood Reporter?
::::::::If anyone bothered to go to her Pinterest Boards online (opera and child star) which I have supplied to all which includes the full newspaper clippings, interviews, reviews, actual contracts and more, I would think her wiki page would be accurate but it is not. Most of the information on my mom is from a time where minimal documents have been digitized and it was abroad.  The information in Wiki is from the very few references they could find online, but not entirely accurate because they have her in the US when she was clearly abroad, so whoever found the info. got the wrong person or bad source.  I have ALL the saved reliable credited newspapers with articles, interviews, reviews of her all over the world, which are all posted and downloaded online for all to see and use.
::::::::June Preston Opera
::::::::June Preston Child Star
::::::::As YOU requested, this is what is inaccurate: 
::::::::1)As a child star, she was promoted with heavy marketing and merchandising to position her as the next Shirley Temple. Actually, She was promoted as June Preston, not a second to Shirley Temple.This would be more accurate: Preston was born in Glendale, California. She made her screen debut at age 4 after being spotted on the RKO lot by an executive who requested an immediate screen test that landed her first role as Mrs. Blewett's Daughter in the 1934 film "Anne of Green Gables", and went on to do various other movies including Christmas in July, Have A Heart, In Love With Life, Maytime, Second Fiddle, History Is Made at Night, and Our Gang Follies. With her increasing popularity, she then went on to sign on with major merchandising contracts for various apparel lines including June Preston Frocks, JP Fairy Tale Frocks, a June Preston doll, suites, hats, shoes and toys, paint sets, paper cut out books, and more.
::::::::2) Raised in Temple, Texas, Preston began her film career after her photograph was shown to the casting office of RKO in 1934, and was cast in a small role in Anne of Green Gables.
::::::::Actually, She born and raised in Glendale, CA went to Sherman TX shortly before being "Spotted on the RKO Lot by an executive who requested an immediate screen test which led to a 7 year contract with RKO then another at age 9...
::::::::3)Preston then signed a contract with the studio and appeared in short films. (Actually they were not just short films only)
::::::::She also appeared in the 1934 MGM film Have a Heart. By 1936, she was promoted as an RKO "featured child player" and clothing model. She also had a small role in the film Our Gang Follies of 1938. For several years, a clothing line was produced under her name, including dresses named June Preston Frocks. Actually, she appears in films not just short films just look at the obit from the Hollywood Reporter, he had more information than even I did with her films through his database.  "Featured child Player" was used as she was a feature in a movie such as Christmas in July, just means an actor. And, it was multiple apparel manufactures for Dresses, Coats, Hats, Shoes, a June Preston Doll, and toys
::::::::After her film career ended, she moved to West Seattle and attended James Madison Junior High and then West Seattle High School, graduating in 1947. Her high school would later, in 1989, induct her into their Hall of Fame.) Actually, her career didnt end, she left it to pursue an opera career because she was discovered by a famous Conductor Gustav Stern a German conductor and professor at Seattle University who coached her from age 15-16 and led her to worldwide fame (which is written in a 1975 book available to see on her Opera Pinterest board.
::::::::Preston studied music at Seattle University where she appeared in the university's 1947 production of Gilbert and Sullivan's H.M.S. Pinafore and was the soprano soloist in the university's performance of Giuseppe Verdi's Requiem in 1949. Actually, she began her studies in Junior High and within her University time period, Preston performed with the Seattle Civic Light Opera Company with which Stern conducted several operettas featuring Preston in the lead, such as Camille in "The Merry Widow", Marietta in "Naughty Marietta", Micaëla in "Carmen", Gianetta in "Gondoliers" "New Moon", and "Der Fledermaus". In that time Preston also performed in the Metropolitan Theater, Seattle Civic Auditorium under the baton of Gustav Stern (All seen on Opera Pinterest Board)
::::::::In 1950, she began a singing tour through Mexico, performing in Guadalajara at the Degollado Theater in July.  Actually, Beginning at age 22, Preston was sponsored by CocaCola, McCann-Erickson, Gaseosas, Fridgidaire, and the US Embassy for Radio & TV tours in over 6 countries, Coca Cola publicized Preston as "The Golden Voice" and she was the exclusive artist for McCann-Erickson. In late 1949 Preston began touring in North America performing in top Opera Houses, 1950 onward she performed in top opera houses such as, the Teatro Colón in Buenos Aires which has near-perfect acoustics, Teatro Nacional de Costa Rica, Palacio de Bellas Artes in Mexico City, Teatro Municipal in Santiago, Chile, Teatro Municipal, Rio de Janeiro, Gran Teatre del Liceu, Barcelona. As well as performing recitals for Presidents, and Diplomats. There were several US Embassy galas in honor of June Preston throughout Central and South America where she also performed as the featured guest. Preston was considered the "Established favorite in the lyric theaters in Central and South America." 
::::::::'''
::::::::In the summer of 1952 she toured with a company led by Argentine opera impresario Gregorio Ravic, which included Nicola Moscona, Jean Madeira, and Graciela Rivera, for four weeks of performances in cities in Colombia. Preston sang the role of Mimi in La bohème opposite the tenor Walter Fredericks as Rodolfo. Actually, In 1952, she joined the cast of the Metropolitan Opera on the "Stars of the Metropolitan Opera" tour in the lead roll of "Mimi" in La Bohème opposite Metropolitan star, Jan Peerce as Rodolfo as well as Walter Fredericks, Nicola Moscona, Stefan Ballarini, Uta Graf, and the great Salvatore Baccaloni.  And on a separate tour that year, Preston performed in the lead as "Floria Tosca" in "Tosca", opposite Tenor Walter Fredericks, Salvatore Baccaloni and others of the Metropolitan Opera. This is all in print reliable sourced newspapers located on her Pinterest Opera Board 
::::::::She was a member of the chorus of the San Francisco Opera for the 1952-1953 season and 1953-1954 season.  Beginning a performance tour through the Caribbean in early 1954, she conducted a series of singing acts in February of that year starting in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. Later in the month, she traveled to Roatán, Honduras and performed with pianist Manuel Rueda from the Dominican Republic. Actually, this is the worst inaccurate information, a Chorus girl?  She was NOT a chorus girl in these years.  She was NOT even in this country in the times you have on there, she was on tour abroad starting 1950-1960 (you can see all the newspaper clippings, programs, etc. for each of those years on her Pinterest Opera Page showing you she was not even in the US at this time. She was already an established Opera singer touring North/Central/South americas and then Europe on the BBC, Telephone Hour and sponsored by Coca Cola and exclusive artist for McCann Erickson etc. She did not do "Singing Acts" she performed Operas and Concert Recitals, My Lord, if you look at her Pinterest Opera Board all tours which are shown by BY YEAR, Newspaper Reviews, Interviews, programs, TV Shows etc.  Important like that should be on her wiki page.    
::::::::On 4 and 5 November 1961, at the Kiel Opera House in St. Louis, she was a soloist in the final movement of Beethoven's Symphony No. 9 in concert with the St. Louis Symphony Orchestra. She subsequently began a tour of recitals in Europe. In October 1962, she sang at Op Gouden Wieken, a concert hall in The Hague. She gave a recital on 30 November 1962 in Barcelona at the Palau de la Música Catalana and a subsequent performance in Tarragona on 3 December 1962 . Actually, this is not bad but very minimal, it should read: In 1960 Preston returned to the US and made her debut at the St. Louis Symphony Hall as a guest star under the baton of Leopold Stokowski as the soloist singer for last movement finale of Beethoven's Ninth Symphony. Other guest stars included, Isaac Stern, Leonard Bernstein, Leslie Chabay and Jean Madeira. Following was Preston European tour where she debut at the Concertgebouw in Amsterdam, and thereafter touring throughout Europe performing in the most prestigious Opera Houses in Europe such as Palais Garnier, Teatro alla Scala, Parnassos Concert Hall in Athens Greece, Teatro Municipal, Lisbon Portugal, El Palacio de la Música, Barcelona Spain, Teatre del Liceu, Gran Teatre del Liceu, Teatro Nacional de São Carlos, and many more. The majority of Preston's performances were overseas. (all this documentation full newspapers can be seen on her Pinterest Board)
::::::::And why not add the Walter Winchell column and the was a fan of hers? Such as his write up about her European tour (which is on her Pinterest Opera board under Walter Winchell) Walter Winchell Column: December 20 1962: Page 24. "June Preston, American opera-lark, is getting rave notice in Europe. From an Amsterdam critic: "A smash! Every area a jewel!" June shrugged off the stallers along Broadway and is booked solid around the world..."
::::::::'''
::::::::In the late 80's, Preston was signed as a cover performer for Kate Smith patriotic songs. "Why this is on her wiki page is beyond me,  She did this as a favor for a friend for a benefit, this is just stretching to find something to put on her page that clearly doesn't need to be, it was in print one time so that is why they put it on, but is this really relevant? no it's not. 
::::::::?Notes: Ravic's company was known as the "Compañía de Ópera Estrellas del Metropolitan" (Stars of the Metropolitan) as several of the ensemble's leads were principal artists of the Metropolitan Opera (the "Met") who performed with this touring group while on summer break from the Met. However, it was not affiliated with the Met and also employed singers from other American opera companies. A 1952 Variety article reported that Preston was married to Ravic at this time.  Actually my Mother was NOT married to this person, he was her manager until 1952 when she fired him.  June Preston was married to one man, my father Saul Houben who died in 1982 and she NEVER remarried.  So kindly take off that she was married to Ravic? it was a mistake printed in the paper as I see it myself.  It was a mistake which happened frequently in those days. 
::::::::And what about the top vocal coaches she studied with? The great Lotte Lehmann, Edwin McArthur who worked with her a year to prepare for her for European tour in 1961, and  Richard Lert, Sir Thomas Beecham and what about the newspaper stating she was offered to join La Scala in Milan? Or She being signed as first soprano at Teatro Colon in Buenos Aires one of the top opera houses in the world, and signed with multiple Symphony Orchestras as soloist which is all seen on her Pinterest Board (actual contracts, newspaper articles stating this). There is much no one has bothered to actually read about her to fix this page.
::::::::I hope this is helpful to see the misinformation and lack of information? Maybe follow the obituary the credited and sourced Hollywood Reporter did on her in addition to all the sourced and credited newspaper articles, interviews, critics, reviews that can be seen and downloaded from her Pinterest Opera Page and Pinterest Movie Page may help.  
I have copied this here, because it will get a larger audience here. Theroadislong (talk) 21:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: * Neither of those were incorrect findings. The group that she toured with purposefully named themselves in relation to the Met and had several Met stars involved. Thinking it was a part of the Met was just a normal and completely understandable misconception. None of the film career has been found to be exaggerated, since all Sabrina said was that her mother was involved in those films based on the reliable source material she had available. And she has provided all of those sources for perusal. Furthermore, you keep reinstating a claim that she says was never true (and she would know whom her own mother was married to) and we can't find any corroborating evidence for the claim in the first place. Her marrying Ravic is the sort of thing that would have gotten additional coverage of even a mention outside of a single line at the end of a Bogota-transmitted article. And yet we can find nothing. No marriage documents, no coverage of a marriage occurring, no mention even of them being husband and wife outside of this one sentence. Can it be corroborated with any evidence whatsoever? SilverserenC 01:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: *Variety is a highly respected publication and I trust its veracity far more than a WP:COI editor. The credence you are giving to the subject's daughter is concerning and contradicts policy at WP:COI. Further, the lack of "marriage records" could easily be because they were married in South America. We trust independent references (which Variety is) over individuals connected to the subject. Further, the marriage provides context to the subject's involvement with this tour. Hiding the marriage is deceptive and changes the way the events are perceived in a way that is unethical. There is a pattern of deceptively editing facts to make things appear more impressive than they are. I don't think this is unintentional. Lastly, the finding was categorically incorrect. She didn't work with or for the Met. Period. The confusion by the subject's daughter just reinforces the fact that she doesn't have enough distance from the subject to be an accurate reporter of her mother's career. I get the sense that her mother probably exaggerated her achievements (many working artists do) as a way to promote herself (PR is important for working artists), and that her daughter is repeating things she was told or overheard. That's just a guess on my part, but it all comes back to the need to not base our content on information from sources that lack sufficient independence to be considered reliable. Additionally, her daughter also lacks critical judgement in evaluating primary sources. Not everything in a concert program is necessarily accurate (PR/marketing is often used in programs to sell their product over necessarily being accurate or truthful). That's why the lack of quality secondary sources on this subject from a carer long perspective is so concerning. Additionally, we lack any reviews of Preston in a major opera production in a major opera house. How can someone be a "celebrated opera singer" when we can't find a review of her in a notable opera production (by this I mean an opera production which has been part academic discourse on opera in published literature in the field; any celebrated opera singer would be in multiple productions of this kind), have no record of any recordings, or verify from an independent ref that she actually performed at some of the opera houses provided by her daughter above? Frankly, its an anathema.   4meter4 (talk) 01:22, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: * And, as I have repeatedly pointed out, she has provided all of the sources for that. Dozens of them. You keep saying sources don't exist and seem to be purposefully not looking at any of the sources presented. The article already includes a number of reliable references to her performances at opera houses around the world. I don't know why you're so determined to view the article subject negatively, but it's clear you are putting forth no effort to actually improve the article despite readily available sources being given to do so. And instead are trying to actively push negative commentary about the article subject. Your neutrality is honestly something I seriously question, since we already know about Sabrina's COI on the subject. SilverserenC 02:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Sigh. Silver seren, respectfully I disagree with you that the sources verify the majority of her daughter's claims outside of what is currently in the article. Considering that I have added many sources to this article and content (from reliable references), I find your comment to be insulting and disingenuous and lacking in good faith. Further, critical reviews in local papers (while verifying her work) do not verify the significance of those performances. My point was we don't have any record of her in academic journal articles, major reference works on opera and opera singers, etc. You are missing what I am saying. I am pointing out the deficit of sources which evaluate Ms. Preston's career from a long term perspective. Piecing together a review here and a review here doesn't do the work of context; which is what historical/ biographical research is all about. With a lack of such literature it's hard to justify many of the claims made by Ms. Preston's daughter about the overall significance of her mother's career. Lastly, given that her mother is listed as part of the SFO chorus in published sources from the 1950s, her daughter's reaction to that content is illuminating to the problems currently at hand with WP:COI. It's not unusual for opera singers to perform in the opera chorus in their early career while also taking on roles elsewhere (and the SFO in those days had an unusual schedule where operas were staged closely together in what was akin to a bi-annual opera festival; making it very possible for artists to maintain a busy performing career elsewhere simultaneously). Angela Gheorghiu would be an example of a singer who did this.  Best. 4meter4 (talk) 02:22, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding the significance of the roles, I would not take the daughter’s claims at face value. For instance,  - Micaëla is definitely not a lead character in Carmen (she probably gets the least stage time of all female characters), so I doubt any RS printed this (also, it’s die Fledermaus). TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 09:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't agree with that assessment of the role of Micaëla. Micaëla is the only female character with a long aria besides Carmen. "Je dis que rien m'epouvante" is six and a half minutes long, and when done well (which it so often isn't sadly), a show stopper. While Mercédès and Frasquita get more stage time, they don't have much solo singing to do in their musical numbers with Carmen (singing almost entirely as a trio; with less than two minutes of solo singing in the whole opera between them), and have no arias. I would consider Micaëla the second largest role for a woman in that opera. It's a more substantial part vocally than either Mercédès or Frasquita, and her character has more drama in relation to the opera's plot. Regardless, that opera would never be labeled/listed as an operetta so I agree that there is something wonky with that statement. Best.4meter4 (talk) 18:07, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested edits from June Preston's daughter 

message: I removed this section, it was unsourced, the roles were minor and largely uncredited and the editor who added them is partially blocked for sockpuppetry. Theroadislong (talk) 06:50, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Filmography