Talk:Adrienne Shelly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

[edit] Illegal immigrant

Personally, I dont see how adding that Pillco is an illegal immigrant adds greatly to the story, but if you do want to source that addition, see this search: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=UTF-8&q=%22Diego+Pillco%22+illegal&btnG=Search+News, but be careful, it looks like some of those sources may use this article as their basis. That search may return more reliable sources in coming days.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:06, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

The NY Daily News mentioned it [1] If the guy was from Minnesota, they would have written that. Barneygumble 15:48, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Boy, you libs can't keep your bias out of anything, huh?

The fact of the matter is this: If Pillco was deported or captured, Adrieene would be alive today. But no, people will have to die because of the liberal/socialist agenda.

Say, is killing innocent women a job illegals will do that Americans dont' want to?

If Republicans cared about illegals, they would have done something about it. They don't, and they didn't. It keeps their costs down and brings money in. Republicans care about nothing but money. If the guy's here illegally, that could be newsworthy, but it is also inherent xenophobic POV-pushing. Wahkeenah 00:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

This discussion makes me mad. Please leave grubby partisan politics out of this - it's not only POV, but, for Pete's sake, a woman has died! A bit of respect, please. --Iacobus 23:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

• As it should, and whatever we say here is not going to bring her back to life. Here's the main point: In "yellow journalism" school, whenever a crime happens, it "spices up" the story to point out that the criminal was an immigrant, legal or otherwise: "If he weren't here, this wouldn't have happened." 100 years ago, even if a legal immigrant did something bad, the papers would be sure to point out that he was from elsewhere, thus stirring fears about immigrants. Is that our purpose in this article? Wahkeenah 00:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Foundation Link asking for Money

This article briefly contained a direct solicitation for financial contributions to a yet to be established foundation. That content was deleted as a copy vio. Now it is back contained in a link. Apparently the foundation is still not established as a legal entity. But aside from that, surely seeking contributions to a foundation, whether good or bad, is not appropriate whether done directly or as a link. Is the solicitation of funds here acceptable? Does it depend on whether it is for a good purpose which would mean we would have to decide whether this is good otherwise, seeking contributions with evil purposes would be permitted as well. I believe this reference should be deleted altogether, but before doing so, I raise the matter here. Comments? KenWalker | Talk 05:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I removed both, but I think it's encyclopedic info. It is IMO an acceptable addition to this woman's bio, and whether or not the charity has been incorporated yet, there is a widely-circulated press release announcing it (which is where the original text was taken from, which is why it was removed as a copyvio). If the link (I haven't checked it) can also be considered verification of the added content, I don't see why it should be removed. A link to a charity that solicits donations is not, as far as I know, forbidden by any WP policies. But I might be wrong. If you feel strongly about it, you could always find a different copy of the information (although that seems illogical to me, since there may be people who would want to read more on the official website). I'm going to check now to make sure the re-added info is no longer a copyvio. Anchoress 05:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The link is just to the press release; I don't see any problem with that. Anchoress 05:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Quote in the references section

What's it doing there? Anchoress 05:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

That's a very good question. I have no idea so I changed it to a normal reference, as I have had to do for almost every one added. Way beyond the scope of this, but this article has really convinced me that we do have a problem with the complexity of adding references or convincing users to bother trying to figure out how to do so properly, or both. After Shelly died and I reworked the article, multiple users contributed and despite inline citation markup and properly formatted examples already present in the article, almost every addition was still given a naked embedded link.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)