Jump to content

Talk:Hannah Giles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.244.125.38 (talk) at 06:22, 18 September 2009. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconPolitics Redirect‑class
WikiProject iconThis redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.
RedirectThis redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Contesting PROD tag

This young woman has been profiled in multiple reliable sources and her work has directly led to bipartisan legislative action against ACORN. Her name draws 500+ hits on Google News. Not sure I see how she would not be considered notable by any stretch of the imagination. Can you be more specific as to what this stub article lacks by way of notability? Per CSD A7 (emphasis per original)

The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source.

Ronnotel (talk) 12:35, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This stub contains adequate references and seems to be written with a neutral POV insofar as any accolades for Miss Giles are given in the cited references. This is not a case where a person lacking notability is writing about themselves nor is it an attempt to increase the credibility of someone lacking notability. The very fact that Miss Giles' actions have ultimately motivated the Senate to move speedily to propose and vote on NEW legislation (withdrawal of programmed ACORN funding) speaks for itself when considering the impact of Miss Giles' actions. The call for speedy deletion is unwarranted in this case. ⁃ Firewall 13:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly Not Neutral

This article contains far too many unnecessary adjectives and dramaticized language for an encyclopedia entry. Citing editorials praising the subject is hardly neutral unless there is also reference to criticism. If you wish people to know about the subject and her accomplishments simply detail them in a factual manner without so much commentary mixed in. 128.227.171.200 (talk) 18:11, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So far the notable coverage I could find in the reliable sources has been uniformly positive. If there is negative coverage that can be reliably sourced, then that should be added as well. And yes, I do think the article is neutral. The POV tag should only be used if the tone of the article does not reflect the breadth of coverage in reliable sources. I don't think that's the case here. Ronnotel (talk) 18:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]


NOT#NEWS

Can someone explain how this article squares with Wikipedia's policy NOT#NEWS?

The question is not whether the subject is a current event, but whether it is notable. I think it's pretty easy to make the case that Ms. Giles is notable - see the citations. Ronnotel (talk) 17:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Movement Conservative

She may call herself an aspiring "journalist," but she's more of an aspiring conservative activist. She self-reported interning at National Journalism Center, a right-wing institution that trains conservative commentators. Additionally, she is the young (20 yo) daughter of a conservative activist commentator Doug Giles. When she is referred to as a "minister's daughter" that is as meaningful as if Jerry Falwell's or Pat Robertson's daughter were referred to that way.