Talk:Maya Angelou

• According to...

  The article is crawling with "'According to ..." constructions. This is useless verbiage in an already overlong article. For the love of Pete, there is even "according to Gillespie, a large group of friends and extended family." Is this in doubt? That she had friends and family? Wikipedia has refs and footnotes for the express purpose of avoiding such clutter in the main body of text. Abductive (reasoning) 16:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  Then for heaven's sake, fix it. Do a copy-edit. And please--"overlong"? This article is a FA, so it's gone through all kinds of vetting from other experienced editors who obviously didn't think so at the time of its review, and who felt that its length was worthy of its subject. They also felt that this article, with the amount of sources available, was broad and comprehensive enough. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  It's a lot of work. Saying something is FA doesn't mean it is supposed to be written like a undergrad senior thesis with loads of quotes and groveling acknowledgement of the mighty scholars who have gone before. Abductive (reasoning) 05:30, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Huh? You're kidding, right? Have you any idea how many hours that I've spent on these articles? How about asking nicely, like this: "Hey, I have a suggestion for how you can improve this article." That's what we're all here for, right? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:02, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Quotes, tributes etc

  I've (twice) trimmed the presidential quotes and would be extremely loth to see this become a collection of tributes. --John (talk) 21:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  If you want to see what a real "quotefarm" looks like, then see the BBC report, or the CBS report. When I added in some reaction to her death, I deliberately didn't add in celebrity Twitter-based comments, which would have been excessive. But I didn't think brief comments from two US presidents (heads of state, of course, not simply political figures) were excessive (which is why I added them in the first place) and am puzzled why you chose to leave the (much more pedestrian) quote from Harold Augenbraum (which was at the time the only "world of literature" tribute I could find) when Augenbraum has infinitely less worldwide name recognition than Obama or Clinton. But as I don't care about this really, you can have your way. Bencherlite^Talk 23:11, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  This is Wikipedia, which has a policy about such things. There are other policies that we need to be mindful of, such as WP:NOTNEWS, WP:CRYSTAL, WP:TEA (which is a suggestion, but a good one), WP:DEADLINE, WP:FORUM. I'm sure there are others. I suggest that since it's a FA already, we wait a little while and see what reports come out before we add to or change much of this article. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  I have to state that, like Gandydancer, I also see nothing wrong with including these two relevant quotes that John re-removed. At the same time, John has a point about WP:QUOTEFARM and being careful to not let that section become a collection of quotes similar to Wikipedia Reception sections (such as the Critical reception sections of the vast majority of Wikipedia film articles). We can summarize statements in our own words, of course, where appropriate. Flyer22 (talk) 03:37, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Angelou was a writer, not a politician. It is significant that two former presidents eulogized her. If the wording of their eulogies becomes important we can include it. I don't think at this stage the wordings are important, which is why I trimmed it. --John (talk) 06:13, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  One's the current president and the other's a former president, but what you meant is clear; I'm simply noting the "current; former" status because I'm sometimes nitpicky like that. Flyer22 (talk) 06:21, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Oops, of course, you are right. Must drink more coffee. --John (talk) 06:34, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  I'm fine with the wording as it currently stands, although I suggest that we add info about all the accolades, as the WSJ reports here [1]. I'd also like to replace the refs from the local TV stations with more reliable ones, since there are plenty. There have been a few useful articles that we can use, but I'd like to wait a little while before we add the info from them. Yes, coffee's always a good idea; alcohol too. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Semiprotection

  Why is this article semi protected? 141.6.11.16 (talk) 18:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.6.11.15 (talk)

  It looks like User:Bencherlite protected it a couple of months ago for TFA purposes. Meantime, do you have any edits you want to propose? --John (talk) 22:39, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  No, I gave it temporary full move-protection in 2013 (not a couple of months ago) for TFA purposes; it was already semi-protected indefinitely (and has been since February 2010) because of BLP-infringing edits, and I didn't change that. Bencherlite^Talk 22:57, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

  That is correct, although I didn't remember the timing of it. This article has historically been vandalized, in horrible and ugly ways. With her death, the protection is fortunate. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:58, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Oops. Note to self: start wearing reading glasses when examining protection logs. --John (talk) 06:11, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  African American?

  I see other poets listed by their nationality, not their nationality plus race. Can we call her an "American" in the lead?

  Done. Rothorpe (talk) 02:22, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  
  Race and Culture in regard to Black is one and the same in the United States of America. You cannot disassociate the two in this regard.shiznaw (talk) 00:05, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

  While I understand race/ethnicity is significant, Maya Angelou's race is not her nationality. Nationality is the descriptor used in the lead on Wikipedia. Notice that Billie Holiday is listed as an American Jazz singer, Michelle Obama as an American lawyer etc. Also, Angelou's ethnicity, African American, is listed in the info box and also referred to throughout the article, so it seems well covered. --BoboMeowCat (talk) 15:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  The answer can be found at WP:BLPLEAD. Ethnicity and nationality should be placed in the first paragraph if they are important to the life and career of the subject. In Angelou's case, they are critically important. A side benefit is that Angelou's ethnicity also names her nationality: African American. Binksternet (talk) 15:15, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  I think it could be argued that race is significant to the life and career of most if not all African-Americans (actually race seems pretty significant to the life of all Americans period, whether it be via heritage, culture, white privilege etc). I think this is a dangerous precedent and it also doesn't appear to be how it is done on Wikipedia (with the exception of biographies of former american slaves, who were not technically considered full American citizens under the laws at the time) People from all over the world read Wikipedia, and Maya Angelou, Billie Holiday Michelle Obama etc are/were Americans in terms of their nationality. The precedent on WP is to use nationality as the descriptor in the lead--BoboMeowCat (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  You're saying we should ignore the guideline and do something different, because other articles do it? Binksternet (talk) 16:40, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  No. What I'm saying is Angelou's ethnicity should not replace her nationality, or come before her nationality in the lead. If the content of the article stresses her ethnicity to the point that it should be emphasized in the lead and should be included under WP:BLPLEAD, it should be done in later sentences of the lead, similar to how it is done in the Oprah Winfrey article. --BoboMeowCat (talk) 16:59, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  I want to be clear that what I'm after is the honoring of Angelou's legacy, the acknowledgement of her critical importance to African American literature. I'm not trying to pigeonhole her. Binksternet (talk) 18:19, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  It looks like there are some problems with the guideline, but solving them isn't what we're here for. You might be surprised to hear that I don't care one way or the other, as long as Angelou's legacy as an African American writer is preserved, which it is in this article. The rest of the lead does a fine job at describing her importance as an African American writer and poet, so I'm fine with leaving the most recent edit as is. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:31, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

  Semi-protected edit request on 29 May 2014

  The line "Challener argued that Angelou's book has provided a "useful framework" for exploring the obstacles many children like have Maya faced and how communities have helped them succeed." The error is the "like have Maya". It should read "Challener argued that Angelou's book has provided a "useful framework" for exploring the obstacles many children like Maya have faced and how communities have helped them succeed." 2601:6:1400:D7:5AB0:35FF:FE60:955B (talk) 02:00, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Done BryanG (talk) 02:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Page views

  It might be of interest to some folks that yesterday, the day Dr. Angelou died (5/28), this article received over 600,000 views; as of this morning (5/29), it has received almost 350,000 [2]. (I'll update the latter number tomorrow.) While it isn't nearly as many as Michael Jackson received the week following his death [3], it's still significant, with a 24,000% increase. That increase, however, is similar to Jackson's increase (37,000%). Demonstrates the importance of Wikipedia, and how crucial it is for the articles here to be of high quality. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:57, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  One more thing to add: I've only glanced at the numbers of Angelou's other articles, but there's a similar increase. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:01, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

  Memoirs

  Is not the term 'memoir' more accurate than 'autobiography' in almost every instance of the latters usage on this page? Gareth E Kegg (talk) 00:40, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  No it is not. "Autobiography" is how Angelou and most scholars refer to her seven books. Part of the reason for it is that until the late 20th century, after Angelou began writing, the memoir was a subcategory of the autobiography, and they were often used interchangeably. I suppose if Angelou began writing her books a decade or two later, they would be called memoirs in the more modern definition and usage. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:31, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  Great explanation, thank you. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 07:10, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  Name pronunciation

  According to an NPR interview in which she is asked to pronounce it, her last name is pronounced "an-jel-oh." I don't know how to modify the IPA but I can locate a link to the source so that this may be corrected.--~TPW 20:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  The IPA already gives that pronunciation. Rothorpe (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

  She did not earn a university degree...it was Angelou's preference that she be called "Dr. Angelou" by people outside of her family and close friends

  The article mentions her honorary degrees but doesn't name any specific ones.

  I was present when she received an honorary doctorate from Centenary College of Louisiana in May, 1989. I believe it would be nice to know that she had a reason for wanting to be called "Dr Angelou." Morag MacGregor (talk) 17:03, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  Yes, User:Morag MacGregor, this article is very clear about these facts. It states that she only earned a high school degree, and that she preferred to be called "Dr." None of the sources specifically explain why; just that it was her preference. Listing all her honorary degrees (over 50) would make this article too long. However, her honorary degrees are listed in List of honors received by Maya Angelou. How fortunate you were to hear Angelou speak in public, which I'm sure was a treat. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:37, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

  Typical Hagiography of a Liberal Icon

  Where is the controversies section? She had a lot of detractors, you know. If she was a conservative darling instead of a liberal one, the controversies section would be the LONGEST part! lol But, wikipedia again discredits itself as any kind of legitimate source of information by daring not to present any views countervailing the left wing orthodoxy.99.185.56.93 (talk) 01:11, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

  You may want to read WP:CRIT and WP:NPOV for starters. TechBear | Talk | Contributions 01:54, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

  Also, this article is a presentation of Dr. Angelou's life. Just because there isn't a "Controversy" section doesn't mean that all aspects, positive and negative, aren't presented. Because they are. If you want to read about the controversies surrounding her, go read the articles about all seven of her autobiographies, Poetry of Maya Angelou, and Themes in Maya Angelou's autobiographies, all of which are FAs. And then while you're at it, go read some of her books, which can't hurt, right? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 02:55, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

  Plagiarism

  You may wish to add a section dealing with Maya Angelou's plagiarism issues, particularly regarding the recent controversy of the US postage stamp issued in 2015.

  Autobiography

  The autobiography, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings (which I just read), only goes up to the birth of her son, and does not include anything about her life after that. Note 23 (Cliff Notes) is incorrect. Further autobiographical information is probably in another one of her books (which I am looking forward to reading.) rsmtime — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsmtime (talk • contribs) 15:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

  User:Rsmtime, thanks for bringing this to our attention. With all the increased traffic to this article since Dr. Angelou's death (6 1/2 million views the week following), it's been a challenge to keep up with all the edits and ensure that they're accurate and correctly sourced. You're right; the paragraph was incorrect, and additionally, Cliffs Notes is not a reliable source. Therefore, I removed it. Again, thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:26, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

  Description of Dr Angelou's occupation as 'actress'

  This article is very informative and covers Dr Angelou well, however I would like to add that she would have considered herself an 'actor' and not an 'actress' I believe I heard her say something to the effect in the 80's that you are the thing and not the gender of the thing. R Sang UK (talk) 00:25, 9 November 2014 (UTC)