Talk:Geoffrey Bolton

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Geoffrey Bolton 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

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
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

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.

Portal	Geoffrey Bolton is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Stub	This article has been rated as stub-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] earlier comments

Two of the editors of this page (User:WA Bolton and User:Melancholia) have now been determined to be sockpuppets of a third (User:Velela), and accordingly blocked. These sockpuppets were used to give the impression that there was consensus for Bolton's academic career to be presented in bullet point form rather than prose, contrary to the guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.

With the puppets and their puppeteer out of the way, I hereby propose to reinstate the prose paragraph version of Bolton's academic career. All other recent contributions will of course be retained. Comments please. Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 12:22, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I would not recommend that course of action; I truly believe that the bullet-point format is better for the academic career section. Geoffrey Bolton may well be notable, but if so, then it's not for his list of job titles, the like of which almost any academic could produce. His importance lies in his published work, which is currently discussed in the first paragraph (where it belongs), and with a bibliography (which I suspect is still incomplete, by the way) later on. That he brought greater exposure to the history of Western Australia is good work, and worth mentioning. That he was Visiting Commonwealth Fellow at St John's College, Cambridge 1978 and 1979 seems of less general interest. I don't say that that information should be deleted, just that it should not be given undue prominence by being incorporated into the main text. I suspect, actually, that as the article grows, this debate will become more or less meaningless, so a concerted effort to expand it may be the best way forward. I just wish I knew more about the topic... --Stemonitis 12:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 16:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)