Talk:Larissa Kelly

KEEP she has proven that by being the all time leader for female contestants she belongs. she has also become the third highest money winner and anyone not wanting her listed in jealous.Ducatigary (talk) 02:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I too would vote to KEEP. Other Jeopardy! winners have articles: Ken Jennings, Dave Madden, Jerome Vered, Frank Spangenberg, Eddie Timanus, maybe a dozen others. (Where is the article on Chuck Forrest?) Larissa Kelly is at least as deserving as the lesser of those luminaries. I wouldn't want to clutter up Wikipedia with an entry for every 5-time winner, but I think Kelly stands out above the crowd, and not only because she is a woman. Patzer42 (talk) 17:54, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Guys, just so you know, I've moved your comment to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larissa Kelly. That's the place for them, not here. Croctotheface (talk) 18:38, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

We shouldn't put the Wikipedia reference in the article text

It doesn't detail anything important about the subject of this biography. Although I see references to "find reliable/secondary sources" in the edit summaries, I'd still be opposed if there did exist such sources, as this content is trivial and does not deserve any weight in the article. Croctotheface (talk) 22:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the Wikipedia reference should not be mentioned in the article text. But I believe it should be mentioned on this Talk page with the {{press}} template. If a particular Wikipedia article is mentioned (in any context) on a national television program, then that qualifies as mention by a media organization. However, Faithlessthewonderboy deleted the template from this Talk page. --Mathew5000 (talk) 00:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Croctotheface, I agree with you completely. The only reason I brought up WP:RS is that there is no way anyone would be able to find reliable source for it, thus putting it to rest for good. As far as the press template goes, I still object to it being put on this talk page (the article was mentioned by a game show contestant, not a media organization), but obviously that's just one man's opinion. If there arises a consensus that it is warranted, by all means put it back. Best, faithless (^speak) 01:07, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm fine with noting it on the talk page, and we may as well use the template, even if it's not 100% accurate, for tracking or whatever else purposes. Croctotheface (talk) 18:22, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

I put a note at Template talk:Press asking for criteria on use of the template. Faithless argues that mention by someone on a game show is not mention by a media organization (even though the game show is distributed by a media organization). But you could make the same point about a Wikipedia page mentioned by a columnist in the New York Times or by Wolf Blitzer on CNN. Surely for purposes of this template, those would be considered mentions "by a media organization" even though strictly speaking they are just mentions by one person. --Mathew5000 (talk) 01:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Well I think that's BS that you can say there are no reliable sources to back it up. It did happen, and you can cite the TV show; it doesn't have to come from being repeated in the news. I see no reason why it can't be included, and we don't have to ignore it just because it's a self-reference to us. The article is not long, and a sentence mentioning it doesn't hurt. Reywas92^Talk 18:30, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

It does hurt because it's trivial, just as noting what color shirt she wore on the show would be trivial. It also makes us look like a rinky dink organization if we feel the need to say "hey! we got a shout-out! WP represent!" within our encyclopedia articles every time someone mentions that they have one. Croctotheface (talk) 18:35, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

We should at least say on this talk page that this is about the question asked by Alex Trebek during the chat session about her Wikipedia page, and that she remarked that some persons here sought to suppress it because she was not important enough. I saw the program, and heard her comments; I likely would not have looked at the page otherwise. It's ridiculous now that some people want to censor out the slightest criticism of the deletionists even on a talk page. Being trivial alone does NOT make something hurtful. Eclecticology (talk) 08:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Science Fiction

As mentioned on Jeopardy, Larissa has written a science fiction story: http://www.strangehorizons.com/2008/20081222/engines-f.shtml —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.225.55 (talk) 03:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The Final 3/24/09

Does anyone find it extremely odd that Larissa guessed incorrectly to final Jeopardy during the finals? I was watching with my Mother and we both just gasped when she got that wrong. It seemed so absurd that she wouldn't know that. There has never been a King Phillip of any British country. I can't imagine someone as knowledgeable and intelligent as Larissa not getting that right or at least getting it 'intelligently' wrong (giving a name that actually was a British King). I just wanted to mention this, because I (and I think the entire audience--studio and nationwide) find it almost ridiculous that she didn't get that right. Even I guessed 'George' and I have only a basic, sketchy knowledge of British Royalty.24.61.21.58 (talk) 17:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)