Talk:Carole Boston Weatherford

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Carole Boston Weatherford article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Please read and understand Wikipedia:Attribution, and secondarily Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Citing sources, and Wikipedia:Reliable sources before making additions to this article, or making suggested additions on this article's talk page. Additions made without references which meet this criteria may be deleted as vandalism. Blogs, emails, fansites and statements made on the radio do not meet this criteria. See talk page guidelines.

Carole Boston Weatherford was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: May 21, 2007

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if 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
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] Failed GA nomination

Funny how GA nominations with comments on how great the article usually indicate pretty poor articles and it seems that the more daring the claim the worse the article is, like in this case.

I am failing this article first and foremost because it absolutely fails the "staying focused" (3b) and "broad in coverage" (3c) criteria of WP:WIAGA. The article only barely touches on the person, bo expands on some incidents involving her, which would be better dealt with (and apparently are) in individual articles on characters and brands she took offence with. I guess that the entirety of the article in its current state (but the first paragraph) should be summed in one sentence stating that she often raises such issues and enumerating examples.

On the other hand, with the description of her photo (btw, missing fair use rationale and likely to be contested) stating that she is "award-winning", I would be eager to know what awards are those and what for. If she has really won some major awards, there is certainly much more to be written about her and her works. OTOH, I do not exclude the possibility that she is only notable due to her comments on the issues listed, and then I would not be convinced she passes the notability criteria for even being included in the encyclopedia.

All in all, please write a really good article about a poet and writer named Carole Boston Weatherford, and not her comments, and then perhaps nominate it for GA. PrinceGloria 23:57, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree. There's a new essay called WP:COATRACK condeming the existence of articles in which slender factual data is used to support critical information. This article has long been a target of Pokemon fans who apparently resent the subject's campaign on that topic. It's better than it has been, but it's still basically a coatrack for criticism. As I recall, there are no profiles on her on the Internet, and the awards listed on her private webpage are minor. Should we merge the Pokemon-related stuff to Jynx and Pokemon (and watching those for NPOV). Minus that topic the subject might not meet our article standards and should probably be considered for deletion. Or, maybe some good sources on her other activities will show up. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 06:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)