Talk:Rebecca Eckler

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 sourced must 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.

Biography: Arts and Entertainment

	Biography portal 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 is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.

Journalism

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: Ontario Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.

Jewish Women

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Jewish Women 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.Jewish WomenWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish WomenTemplate:WikiProject Jewish WomenJewish Women articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph of Rebecca Eckler be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Biography assessment rating comment

WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 19:33, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

I reverted the information about her blog prompting the creation of a parody blog because I think it's an interesting development -- she is a high-profile writer whose work is so despised by some that someone out there has started a blog just to mock her. This fits in with the downward spiral of her daily newspaper career -- she was fired from the Post and is used only on a freelance basis by the Globe, apparently due to the type of writing/spelling/structure/personal-score-settling issues she reveals in her own blog.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by User:DoctorBombay (talk • User:DoctorBombay contribs) 22:22,(UTC).

Editing and civility

Recognizing AspasiaLeonidas as a new account, I think it may be beneficial to read Wikipedia's policy concerning civility.

Concerning AspasiaLeonidas's recent edit, I've made a few changes and thought it might be best to discuss my reasoning.

The information that Eckler is "often derided" is, I feel, rendered superfluous gfiven the Jeffrey Simpson quote which follows. I have appended a citation request to the Simpson quote.

Unless the intent is to encourage judgement, I'm not certain what purpose is being served by adding "By her own admission" to information about the conception of her child. I have removed these four words.

The claim that Eckler has yet to find legal counsel to pursue action against the makers of Knocked Up is contradicted by the article she wrote for Maclean's. The sentence in which this claim is made has been removed.

Although I can't for the life of me see much relevance in the sentence concerning "mommy blogs" and positive reviews, I've let the sentence be. I encourage discussion on this matter.

I have adjusted the reference to Eckler's The Globe and Mail "Mommy Blog" to reflect the fact that the series was not a promotional vehicle. The link to the blog has not been restored as it must be purchased and therefore runs counter to Wikipedia's policy concerning external links.

I have restored the sentence dealing with Eckler's blog and the parody blog entitled NineGramBrain. However, I have not restored the link to the latter as third party blogs run counter to Wikipedia's verifiability guidelines. A tricky one this. Again, I encourage discussion. Victoriagirl 03:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's one of the more fair-handed edit summaries I've yet seen. Thanks for taking the time. The article is vulnerable to being perceived as a disguised attack piece. Sources would help. I would also suggest leading with her works and then having a section on her style -- which has been criticized for its self-absorption. Canuckle 22:55, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi. You cited the need to purchase for deleting link to the parody blog. I don't see a purchase requirement on that site now. If the blog has changed since your edit, that indicates to me that edits to get it in are spam. Regardless, WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided advises against linking to blogs that are not by recognized authorities. Sourced criticism could of course be notable. Canuckle 16:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think I was a little unclear. In that particular paragraph I was referring to Eckler's Globe and Mail "Mommy Blog", which now requires purchase. For this reason, I removed the link. I first removed the NineGramBrain parody blog link, citing verifiability guidelines. Though this concern was never addressed, the link to NineGramBrain was returned. I've since deleted the NineGramBrain link for a second time as it runs counter to the policy concerning external links (as you've pointed out). I've also argued that the parody blog violates biographies of living persons (below). I'm pleased to see discussion on these issues. Victoriagirl 16:31, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

court papers

Should a link to the "Knocked Up" legal filing be added? Is it relevant? See here: [1] Canuckle 00:26, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it relevant. Victoriagirl 16:11, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added it, had second thoughts, looked at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Well known public figures which advises against court documents for bios, undid it and added it to the movie site's controversy section. Canuckle 16:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Globe & Mail and NineGramBrain

I've just reverted the most recent edit and, again, offer my reasoning.

The claim that Eckler's Globe and Mail series was "discontinued due to its promotional nature" quite obviously requires a source. None was provided.

I have again removed the link to NineGramBrain, which as previously stated, runs counter to Wikipedia's verifiability guidelines. I might add that it also violates Wikipedia's policy concerning external links.

To expand on what I wrote in my previous post, I don't believe that mention of an anonymous parody blog is appropriate. I've since investigated further and note that at no point does NineGramBrain identify itself as a parody of Eckler's blog. What's more the profile of this blogger features the address of CrackWhoreConfession.com. I have deleted mention of this blog per Wikipedia's policy concerning biographies of living persons, in particular the section dealing with biased or malicious content. Again, I encourage discussion. Victoriagirl 16:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I restored mention of the parody blog because I think it is significant that this write engenders so much ridicule that she has inspired someone to start up a parody blog. While her name is not mentioned anywhere on the blog, it is clearly based on her own blog -- current posts mention the Apatow lawsuit, and the Toronto Star recently quoted a comment from the blog in a story about Eckler's lawsuit. I have never seen a writer inspire the type of widespread disdain this woman does -- just read the comments on the Globe and Mail's own website regarding her lawsuit -- and I think this entry is incomplete without some mention of that. I have not restored the link to it, but have restored mention of it. It is significant and relevant. DoctorBombay.

Agreed. As the blog has now been identified as a parody by The Toronto Star, a verifiable third-party source, it is worthy of mention. I think a link to NineGramBrain is still out per WP:BLP. Easy enough to find, though. Victoriagirl 21:09, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]