Talk:Liz Claman

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.

[edit] Image

I've removed and deleted the current image, not so much because it would have been "replaceable fair use", but because it wasn't fair use at all; it was falsely tagged as a "promotional" image when no evidence of such a release was provided.

Independent of this, I note that an attack vandal has repeatedly tried to insert a blatantly unflattering screenshot instead of the other photo. This vandal is now indef-blocked, any attempt at re-uploading that image should immediately be reverted and reported at WP:AIV (with a link to this notice). Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:42, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RS of "newladdertosuccess.com"

newladdertosuccess cannot be used as a reference, it is a 'questionable source' per Wikipedia guidelines:

"A questionable source is one with no editorial oversight or fact-checking process, or with a poor reputation for fact-checking. Such sources include websites and publications that ... are promotional in nature... Questionable sources should not be used, except in articles about themselves or their activities."

Removal of reference to possible pending book, this is an encyclopedia, not a promotion site for future books. Books she's published can be cited and referenced. Piperdown 22:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Religion

The sentence lead, "Claman is Jewish" is too blunt, redundant, and unnecessary IMHO. I note the editor also does the same thing in the other article they edit. It is already promintently featured in Liz's info box, and is obvious in the following 2 factoids about her activity in Jewish charities and orgs. Can this be worded better? I have no problem with editors who are proud of their subject's religion, but there's a better way to go about this, and the fact box is fine as a blunt statement of fact. That's what the Info box is there for.Piperdown 23:14, 17 March 2007 (UTC)