Talk:Kaycee Nicole

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Kaycee Nicole has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Internet (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Skepticism (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Women's History (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Kansas (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Kansas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Related links[edit]

I've noticed that various links to old newspaper articles are no longer online. I've added some other sources, including links to articles still in the "Wayback Machine" archive. • SbmeirowTalk • 03:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Basketball Player[edit]

Does anyone know the basketball player used to portray Nicole? Apparently the basketball player nows plays college ball. -RomeW 08:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I found it. The Metafile site lists a first name- "Julie" and says that the last name should be "discretely used", but it's easy to find her last name, her statistics and where she went to school- Southern Nazarene University- so I'm wondering how much of that information should be used here. I'm also curious if we should include a picture (you can still find useable Kaycee Nicole pictures), and which one? -RomeW 09:33, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
According to a comment on museum of hoaxes Julie died in 2005 - is there any proof of this? PMA 06:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Misc[edit]

not compu-stub, there is no hoax-stub, fictional so not person-stub, not exactly history-stub...what kind of stub? RJFJR 23:04, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

Metafilter's participation in the outing should be noted here somewhere - but not by me, as it's before my time. --John Kenneth Fisher 00:28, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Here, have some links. - EurekaLott 02:21, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

I recall a very informative letter written by BigWhiteGuy or someone (the hoster of Kaycee's blog who was deceived) which contradicted some of the theories (or at least one) on this article, but I'm too lazy to find it.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kaycee Nicole/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer:Tom Morris (talk) 16:10, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Scare quotes can be overused, but mostly that has been fixed. For articles on topics like these, it might be an idea to avoid them altogether. For instance, I edited out '"her" hospitalization'. There is no doubt that the persona is female; the problem is that it is a persona. Otherwise, the prose is fine, and by the time I reached the beginning of the section on the unraveling of the hoax, I was actually quite eager to find out what happened!
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    No OR concerns. A few of the references are to user-generated content sites like Kuro5hin and Metafilter but it would be hard to discuss the story without linking to those. They are backed up by links to more traditional sources that back up the assertions.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    No problems. The subject is clearly defined, it's not like it is "List of famous things from the twentieth century" so staying focussed is not a difficult.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    Hard to think of how it could not follow NPOV. Again, it's not a controversial topic (although the syndrome itself may be).
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    No edit warring or other disruption listed in the revision history.
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Obviously very difficult to get images for this kind of article. As there are no articles available,
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Everything checks out okay to me.