Talk:Peter Coogan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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]
	This article is supported by the Arts and Entertainment work group.

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

	comics Portal This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
More information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article has been marked as requiring an image. Please add one in accordance with guidance. This article may need an appropriate infobox template.

An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Peter Coogan, has edited Wikipedia as Petercoogan (talk · contribs). This user's editing has included this article. Readers are encouraged to review Wikipedia:Autobiography for information concerning autobiographical articles on Wikipedia.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Peter Coogan 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

[edit] Published work

I'm wondering if my bibliography should reflect my published work more instead of the papers that I happened to donate to MSU while I was up there. I'm not sure about the Wikipedia propriety of adding content to my wikipedia entry. I've mostly done edits for accuracy and grammar. If anyone, especially the person who did the most recent edits to make the entry conform with Wikipedia's practices, could post a note on this topic, I'd appreciate it. I don't want to shape my wikipedia entry because I have an obvious bias.Petercoogan (talk) 06:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's any potential conflict in simply adding to your bibliography. :o) Sorry I didn't do that from the start... ntnon (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The papers are tricky. Listing them yourself raises questions of whether other people would consider them to be notable enough for encyclopedic entry. Sticking with your published work gives a straightforward, objective list that would be harder for anyone to question on grounds of bias. The fact that you're concerned about bias, of course, speaks very well of you. MMMMMMMM (talk) 07:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't list any unpublished papers. I've seen biographical articles get deleted altogether over things like that. When the person covered in the article edits it very much, the possible conflict of interest can make some delete-prone voters in WP:AFD discussions say, "Well, if this person isn't notable enough for somebody else to write about him, he's probably not notable enough to deserve a Wikipedia article at all. I know I sure haven't heard of him" -- which is a shame sometimes. Ed Brubaker is just one example of someone who made a few edits to his own article before people jumped all over him for it. He apologized profusely (see User_talk:Ed_Brubaker) and has stayed away ever since. Hydra Rider (talk) 07:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Surely there's a difference between "unpublished and unavailable" and "unpublished, but in a special collection"..? When I read Superhero, I was interested in reading other things written by Mr Coogan. To be able to find a list here of the Michigan collection (now deleted, without full discussion) provided me with a place to go and seek out other things. Surely therefore, "Special Collections" are completely different from simply "unpublished." I don't think anybody is asking Mr Coogan to provide a complete list of everything he's every written about anything ever, merely that pertinent (and available, even if in a limited manner) things be listed.

If materials housed in archives are acceptable for citations, would they not be list-able in some bibliographic form..? ntnon (talk) 19:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

My university's archives include letters from donors, minutes from committee meetings, sorority rummage sale announcements, and old banquet menus. I'm afraid that's not sufficient. Wikipedia does not include everything that's available in the world. I think very highly of Peter, and I don't want this article to get gutted or nominated for deletion over material that some Wikipedians will definitely consider unworthy of encyclopedic entry. Hasn't someone already removed that addition? That removal illustrates the concern I'm talking about. Peter was right to raise this concern. Hydra Rider (talk) 07:38, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

And I've seen a lot of bios on small press authors get deleted altogether. Just being the author of a published book isn't sufficient for people to consider you notable enough for an article. Book plus conference should suffice, but don't make any risky edits you have to defend because they might lead to having to defend the existence of the article itself. Doczilla _STOMP! 08:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)