Talk:Carol Kuhlthau

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

I'm a bit boggling about this article. It's titled with the woman's name, when it's overwhelmingly not actually about her, but rather a model she created. The model section is almost entirely in sentence fragments, and should probably be separated into "what the model is" and then "for example, in making a wikipedia article, stage one would be THIS, Stage two would be THAT, etc", just for clarity. the article also has no citations. I'm tagging it unreferenced, wikify, cleanup, tone, and maybe after the model section is cleaned up more, it could be moved to a new section (being moved while it still has references to writing a wikipedia article would make it more confusing, I think). I think this could be a great and informative wikipedia article, if it were just comprehensible. Cantras 19:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I've tried to do what you suggested - hope it's a bit clearer now. It's a shame none of the stages of the Model included "ensuring presentation of researched material is written in an appropriate style". Windymilla 19:36, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category

Wiki likes categories. Can you put Ms. Kuhlthau in an appropriate category? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.167.161.228 (talk) 15:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] More to go

It is appropriate to have the page about her, mentioning both her books and other published works and her widely accepted model of reference work.It would also be appropriate to have a more detailed article on the model. This article should be done first

As for this article, it apparently isn't clear why she is so important, and the following is needed:

listing college degrees with university and year -- and putting the university names in double brackets listing important awards listing important memberships and offices held In addition to books, listing some major published papers, say how many total. State the importance the journals are. Say how many other papers cited them. and, most important, giving some 3rd party sources. A website at a university etc. can be one, but it cannot be the only one. Book reviews are fine. Print or web is OK, but not from a list or a blog. These is, very unfortunately, some prejudice against people from the academic world.

And in this case, some references to general works that use her theory as the model.

I will be glad to helpDGG 05:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)