Talk:La Shawn Barber
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page was voted on for deletion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/La Shawn Barber. There was no consensus. dbenbenn | talk 06:50, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have removed the superflous categories that seemed to make this article look like an advertisement. I have also renamed "Check Her Out" to "External Links". If anyone feels that her somewhat lengthy bibliography is useful to the article, I have no qualms about its return. At present, however, it seemed unnecessary. The "What Others are Saying" section seemed entirely unnecessary.
It would be nice if someone who knows more about Barber wrote a bibliography and expanded the stub. As I stated on the VFD, I think this article should be kept; however, it must be cleaned up to look more like an actual article. -- asciident 14:11, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I reverted the edit by 68.160.239.25 until a more thorough treatment of the article - which hopefully no one will ever find necessary to write. At the least, the accusation is contrary to NPOV while this is a mere stub. Opusaug 03:02, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
The link to http://lashawnbarberexposed.blogspot.com/ has frequently been removed by anons, presumably pro-barber sockpuppets. When I first looked at this link it had legitimate content, but currently appears to be nothing but nonsense, so I'm removing it. Gamaliel 19:46, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] 2nd AFD
This page was again nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/La Shawn Barber (2nd nomination), and the outcome was to keep. Titoxd(?!?) 02:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Links to http://lafondabarber.blogspot.com hidden - should they stay or go?
At the request of the article's subject, I'm hiding the two links to http://lafondabarber.blogspot.com in HTML comments[1].
While that site does offer an alternate POV, and while links to parodies are not off-limits in biographical articles, I'm not sure that this particular parody adds anything significant to the article, beyond accusing Barber of self-promotion. Additionally, Barber herself claims that the parody site is libellous and that its design infringes on her copyright.
I'd like to know the consensus of the community before reinstating or removing those two links. Thanks! - jredmond 19:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Barber's complaints should be irrelevant, and they're probably incorrect anyway, as parody almost always enjoys legal protection. Regardless, I don't see any harm in ditching the link as it's pretty lame and adds little of value to the article. Gamaliel 19:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- I concur with Gamaliel in that Barber's complaints are irrelevant and not libellous, but I do feel it adds value to the article. I don't agree with the parody's POV and I tend to enjoy La Shawn's work, but I have seen the complaints of many others that echoed in the pardoy and I think it deserves to stay. At the very least it should be discussed here for a while before a decision is made either way.--YHoshua 21:30, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- Question: Is it proper to remove a portion of the site that has been there for weeks and then seek a consensus? Shouldn't it stay until one develops? Removing it and then having a discussion seems like poor form.--YHoshua 22:12, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- According to the article history, that link was originally added December 7 by User:68.58.147.15. Since it's somewhat controversial, we can avoid some further vandalism by keeping it hidden from view while discussing it. If you feel strongly that it needs to be visible, though, then by all means restore it. - jredmond 22:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- I don't feel that strongly, and we can wait until a consensus develops. But in the future I think it's a good idea to keep something in place, when it's been there through numerous edits, until a consensus has been reached on the talk page.--YHoshua 02:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- According to the article history, that link was originally added December 7 by User:68.58.147.15. Since it's somewhat controversial, we can avoid some further vandalism by keeping it hidden from view while discussing it. If you feel strongly that it needs to be visible, though, then by all means restore it. - jredmond 22:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
- If this parody does in fact reflect the complaints of many others, perhaps we could link to some of those other complaints instead of this parody? Gamaliel 01:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- One of the best pieces of evidence demonstrating this is a common criticism (which, again, I don't necessarily agree with) is La Shawn's own posts which complain about how frequently she is criticized for "self promotion". A post dated today (Dec. 20) spends several hundred words detailing how common this is, and few things can better demonstrate it than coming from the horses mouth. To be clear, my argument is not that La Shawn self-promotes too much; my argument is that it's a common criticism of her, which she herself admits.--YHoshua 02:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- Question: Is it proper to remove a portion of the site that has been there for weeks and then seek a consensus? Shouldn't it stay until one develops? Removing it and then having a discussion seems like poor form.--YHoshua 22:12, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
I deleted the commented-out links to "lafonda" (before I read this page) because it hasn't been updated since December 2005. BTW, http://lashawnbarberexposed.blogspot.com/ seems to have vanished completely. Cheers, CWC(talk) 19:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Recent clean-up
An anon editor, apparently La Shawn Barber herself, recently edited the article with the (truncated) edit summary
- From La Shawn Barber - This entry does not reflect neutrality. "Gay" sentenced deleted. I'm against a lot of things, including murder and illegal "immigration." Include those, or leave out "gay" comme
You know what? She's right. And she's doing a better job of editing according to Wikipedia policy than us. Cheers, CWC(talk) 08:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- I've received an email from La Shawn Barber confirming that it was she who made the recent edits from an IP address. Cheers, CWC(talk) 15:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Converted to Christianty
So.. she was'nt a christan before? Were here parents Muslims or something, or did she just mean to say that she decideingly acknowledged christ? or did she change sects? help me out. 69.250.130.215 21:42, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 15:48, 9 November 2007 (UTC)