Talk:Julia Griggs Havey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on April 21, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
 |
An individual covered by or significantly related to this article, Julia Griggs Havey, has edited Wikipedia as JuliaHavey (talk · contribs) |
Elonka, although I am reluctant to enter a disupte over the content you recently contributed, based on the fact that we are having editorial disputes on another article; however, your recent edits on this bio are inappropriate. This article, originally submitted by Havey herself, had previously been nominated for speedy deletion in part becuase the article read like a self-promotional advertisement. After considerable input from roughly a dozen different editors, a pared down version [1]] was voted on as acceptable, the article was deemed to be suitable, and the deletion and ad tags were removed. You have now unilaterally reverted the article back to a version that is almost identical to Havey's original. This clearly usurps the consensus of the editors who expended considerable effort in making this article worthy of inclusion. I am going to revert back to the last version prior to your edits. I highly suggest that you go back and review the edit hitory of this article. Rhode Island Red 15:20, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- I did not revert the article, I improved the article, and Kusma agreed.[2] If you disagree with my changes, feel free to submit the article for another AfD. --Elonka 17:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
- Note that there were two issues discussed at the AFD: (1) Is this person important enough to have an article? and (2) Is this article an advertisement? As she is a successful published author, she is important enough per WP:BIO. The self-promotion was adressed by editors rewriting the article during the AFD. Elonka's rewrite did not change the article into an advertisement. Reverting to an older version of inferior quality is not helpful. If you have problems with the article, please provide a list of what needs to be fixed so it can be fixed. (One problem is that the sourcing of some parts is not independent from Julia Havey herself; however, there does not seem to be any reason to doubt the truth of these statements). Kusma (討論) 07:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- I regret if my revert was too extreme. It seemed to me that the latest version read similarly to the version that was whittled down to a stub by several editors prior to the tags being removed. I do think the article would benefit by omission of non-encyclopedic details like (e.g. “She and her mother would stay up late into the night, watching the news from Vietnam, and eating ice cream to improve their mood” and “Shortly after that she learned that her husband was having an affair”). And I agree that sourcing is big problem with this bio. Havey herself seems to be the source of most of the information. If the subject is truly notable, then others who have talked or written about her should be used as sources. The book cover photo strikes me as unnecessary advertising. I’ll leave it to the rest of you to sort out. Just trying to be constructive and no provocation intended. Rhode Island Red 04:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. My own feeling is:
- The "ice cream" comment is relevant as it applies to the beginning of her eating disorder.
- As for Havey being a source, much of this is from an interview on the Discovery Health Channel, which qualifies as reliable. Her books are also usable as sources. Per Wikipedia autobiography guidelines, the subject can be used as a source for information that is relevant to their notability, as long as it is not unduly self-aggrandizing, or contradicted by other published sources.
- Book cover photos are used routinely throughout Wikipedia. And if it's any consolation, all we're doing here is including a small image on an author page, instead of actually creating a separate article on each of her books. This seems to me to be appropriate.
- Hope that helps address your concerns, Elonka 08:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. My own feeling is:
- I regret if my revert was too extreme. It seemed to me that the latest version read similarly to the version that was whittled down to a stub by several editors prior to the tags being removed. I do think the article would benefit by omission of non-encyclopedic details like (e.g. “She and her mother would stay up late into the night, watching the news from Vietnam, and eating ice cream to improve their mood” and “Shortly after that she learned that her husband was having an affair”). And I agree that sourcing is big problem with this bio. Havey herself seems to be the source of most of the information. If the subject is truly notable, then others who have talked or written about her should be used as sources. The book cover photo strikes me as unnecessary advertising. I’ll leave it to the rest of you to sort out. Just trying to be constructive and no provocation intended. Rhode Island Red 04:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Note that there were two issues discussed at the AFD: (1) Is this person important enough to have an article? and (2) Is this article an advertisement? As she is a successful published author, she is important enough per WP:BIO. The self-promotion was adressed by editors rewriting the article during the AFD. Elonka's rewrite did not change the article into an advertisement. Reverting to an older version of inferior quality is not helpful. If you have problems with the article, please provide a list of what needs to be fixed so it can be fixed. (One problem is that the sourcing of some parts is not independent from Julia Havey herself; however, there does not seem to be any reason to doubt the truth of these statements). Kusma (討論) 07:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Vice busting (2).jpg
Image:Vice busting (2).jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 05:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
