Talk:Zoe Williams

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-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.)

A "humour piece" is a type of article. Whether or not such an article is funny is subjective, but it can be objectively refered to as a "humour piece" if it is written in a certain style and intended to be humourous. MuttGirl 19:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I wonder if Strobes will note the "corrections" to this article in the next issue...

What kind of a ghastly cretin amends their own Wiki entry in such a manner? Objective journalism - shurely?  :) Darth Doctrinus 19:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's just a fan who was doing the weird fan thing of taking the name as a pseudonym. Either that or someone who actively dislikes Williams and was trying to stir things up, possibly by writing to the Eye themselves - it's an odd coincidence that the "Zoewilliams" user added the Eye as a reference to an article only a week and a half ago.

I've left a message on the user's talk page to see if we can clear it up, but "Wikipedia article edited by unverified account with same name" does seem pretty weak and inconclusive stuff for the Eye to run with, or to include in a Wikipedia biography. --McGeddon 20:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

It's worth noting that the Eye Article was about another journalist, Peter Hitchens, not about Zoe. Her alleged self-editing was merely mentioned as a postscript. As such, it's definitely not worth including in her biography - after all, it's not deemed worth mentioning in Hitchens', and he was the subject of the article. So - I'm removing it. Eliot 13:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

FWIW she didn't seem the type at university to blow her own trumpet that much... and also far too clever to consider changing her own write-up! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.217.52.130 (talk • contribs) 08:26, 5 March 2007.

Yes, I have removed this note about Williams' self-publicity again. It might be funny for a while, but not in an encyclopedia. Also, a sentence in Private Eye is hardly 'much publicity'.Onaraighl 19:32, 11 March 2007 (UTC)