This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Doctor Who, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Doctor Who and its spin-offs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this notice, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Doctor WhoWikipedia:WikiProject Doctor WhoTemplate:WikiProject Doctor WhoDoctor Who articles
Original research/ autobiography/ conflict of interest[edit]
This article appears to have been created by the subject's daughter, with some edits possibly by the subject herself.[1] A strict interpretation of Wikipedia's policies on autobiographies and conflicts of interest would probably lead to the article being deleted; however, since the subject is notable and the claims in the article aren't particularly grandiose, and could probably (mostly) be sourced to independent sources, I think I'll let it slide for now. However, that doesn't mean that the statements which read like original research should go unquestioned. While I don't doubt that Robson drew inspiration from Russian ballet and memento mori statues, Wikipedia requires that statements be attributable to reliable published sources. Although it may seem paradoxical, secondary sources are preferable to primary sources for Wikipedia's purposes. Has Robson ever been interviewed for a newspaper or magazine article? Is she quoted or her work referenced in any books on the history of British television? These are the sorts of sources that would be useful for the article.
Also, phrases like " her style continues to reflect the clarity and directness of fashion drawing" don't quite comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. If reliable secondary sources can be found which characterize Robson's work in this way, a footnote can be added and the clause kept, but otherwise it should be rephrased or deleted. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:21, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
