Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
          A Wikipedia ad has been created for this project page
WikiProject Wiki Loves Women (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Wiki Loves Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women in Africa 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Requested moves

(23 more...)

Sherry Edmundson Fry[edit]

Coming across this image on commons. Wondering if this is the statue of Captain Thomas Abbey (Enfield, Connecticut)]].

Numbering of Patriarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East[edit]

There is a strange leap in Wikipedia's numbering of the Shimun line of patriarchs of the Assyrian Church of the East that is surely a mistake. The succession indicated includes Shimun XVII Abraham (1820–1861), Shimun XVIII Rubil (1861–1903), then the surely mistaken numbering, perhaps due to a mistyping of XIX as XXI, by which the immediate successor of Shimun XVIII is given as Shimun XXI: Shimun XXI Benyamin (1903–1918), Shimun XXII Paulos (1918–1920), Shimun XXIII Eshai (1920–1975). Bealtainemí (talk) 09:30, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I have now mentioned this anomaly also at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard. Bealtainemí (talk) 09:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Since a week has gone by with no comments from others, I will correct the numbering if, after a few more days, there are still no comments. Bealtainemí (talk) 19:17, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Expert attention[edit]

This is a notice about Category: articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. There might be as few as one page in the category, or zero if someone has removed the expert request tag from the page. (talk) 12:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC) Creation of an article: Akihiro Yamada -Wikipedia

Dear Administrators/Shakespeare experts/Friends/Ammarpad/Stormy clouds,

A week ago, in my first approach to Wikipedia, I wrote as follows: 'I am glad to find online a Japanese entry about me: ‘山田昭廣 - Wikipedia’. However, I think that an English entry would be of more use since I am a specialist of English literature, especially Shakespeare. I know that I am not entitled to create an English entry titled ‘Akihiro Yamada – Wikipedia’ myself. So I wish you to be a host for it on your website. What I would like to state in it is very short and the text would run as follows: Akihiro Yamada (born 1929 in Nagoya) is a Japanese scholar specializing in English literature and bibliography. He published some twenty books on Shakespeare and his contemporaries. For more information, visit him at'

This message received three responses, one of them appearing on a 'Teahouse' page ( Teahouse/Questions/Archive 835#Creation of an article: Akihiro Yamada -) reads as follows: 'Essentially, the IP asked about the creation of an article about themselves in, translated from their entry in ja.wikipedia, but was aware that they could not create a translated autobiographical article themselves owing to the obvious conflict of interest. They were subsequently advised to refrain from editing matters related to themselves, and advised of the potential pitfalls of an article about one's self. Finally, the ultimate advice given, which still stands, is that, if a subject is notable enough to merit an article, someone else will create it. If this is not satisfactory, consider requesting a translation. Given the existence of the Japanese article, the inertia to create an English one, given sufficient coverage in reliable sources, is likely lower than from scratch, but such a request would still be heavily scrutinised, and the downsides of an article would still persist. Hope this helps, Stormy clouds (talk) 12:21, 22 September 2018 (UTC)'

I appreciate this advice very much. It has prompted me to write back the following, this time to this page, in the hope that some expert reader will regard my proposal as reasonable enough to consider seriously: Since English-speaking specialists will find the Japanese version of little use, I am proposing for their benefit (and mine) an English version, though very short (which he/she may expand by visiting me at the provided URL, given above). The English version will be of great use to them who would share academic interests with me in order to advance scholarship, simply by clicking the Wikipedia if my proposal be in its website. I am afraid that a mere translation of the Japanese version, primarily addressed to Japanese scholars, will be utterly of no use to English-speaking specialists. I do not know if I am 'notable enough to merit an article' but may I mention that my biography will be found in various editions of Marquis *Who's Who in the World* (U.S.A.) as well as in various publications of International Biographical Centre in Cambridge, U.K. I do hope that there will be some volunteer expert(s) willing to be a host of this entry. Best wishes. Akihiro Yamada— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:38, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Wikipedia:Requested articles would be the best place to request an article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:00, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ammarpad and Stormy clouds: see above --TheSandDoctor Talk 18:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. Personally, I understand the allure of a Wikipedia article, but there are barriers that must be overcome. The rationale The English version will be of great use to them who would share academic interests with me in order to advance scholarship, simply by clicking the Wikipedia if my proposal be in its website. does not instill confidence regarding the value of the article, nor does the (non-existent) idea of a host of an article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a networking tool for academia nor a web host for people's work. I would suggest verifying that the article would be appropriate as an encyclopedia article, and that it is here for the right reasons. However, if any passing editor believes that the reliable sources exist (excluding the subject themselves, who has a conflict of interest) and pass the general notability guidelines, then be bold and go for it. Stormy clouds (talk) 20:53, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Nobel Laureate question[edit]

Hi, there is some discussion on social media whether Donna Strickland, who became only the third female Physics Nobel Laureate today, might have had a Wikipedia page before today, which was then deleted in 2014. There is a log entry that a Wiki lemma with that name was deleted in 2014: [1] - unfortunately, the admin who deleted that page does not appear to be active on WP any more. I'd appreciate any pointers to how it might be possible to retrieve that original page, and reconstruct what might have happened there, and why. Markus Pössel (talk) 10:48, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Not in answer to your question but Draft:Donna Strickland was created 28 March 2018 and declined at WP:AFC 23 May 2018 - lack of significant coverage. Thincat (talk) 18:57, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
@Markus Pössel: she had an unsourced biography posted in 2014. It was deleted because it was a copyright violation. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:13, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you for your answers. As for the "lack of significant coverage", the WP:NACADEMIC criterion "president of a major scientific society" (in her case the Optical Society) should probably have been enough at that time to justify an article even without significant coverage. Is anything preserved to show what the copyright violation consisted of? Markus Pössel (talk) 21:32, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
Generally, content on Wikipedia is hidden instead of deleted. That means that most deleted content is accessible, though, in some cases, not even administrators can access it. In this case, the deleted content was a simple copy-paste from her profile on The Optical Society's website. Someone already merged those deleted revisions into the existing article. I assume anything that was recoverable from those revisions was incorporated into the article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:27, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't know about hidden vs. deleted! I did, in the meantime, find the direct link to the later (March/May 2018) deleted article draft which, for the record, is here. I also came across a thoughtful essay by the editor who rejected that draft (although I disagree with some of the points he makes), namely User:Bradv/Strickland_incident. Markus Pössel (talk) 14:59, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, that's an interesting essay. It's not an easily solved problem. It would probably help if we had more volunteers with expertise in something outside of pop culture. Wikipedia is extremely good at documenting trivia about TV shows and video games. It's not so good at determining if a scientific society is prominent. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:31, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Assist with COI on Bill Libby[edit]

Bill Libby is a lightly sourced article. A new editor purports to be his daughter.[2], [3] To date they have ignored WP:COI and WP:V callouts on their talk. Appreciate any assistance on point, including reconciling any improvements where they can be sourced. UW Dawgs (talk) 00:24, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

@UW Dawgs: if there are problems with a COI editor, the best place to resolve that would probably be Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:16, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Duplicated article[edit]

Guglielmo Della Porta and Guglielmo della Porta seem to be about the same person, but with different content. Someone might want to merge them and maybe do a little cleanup? --Sotho Tal Ker (talk) 01:11, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Discussion of notability criteria[edit]

Dear all, just a neutral pointer that there is a discussion about a proposed change of WP:PROF going on at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(academics)#Proposal_for_addition_to_specific_WP:PROF_notability_criteria that would appear to be of relevance in particular to those writing new biographical articles for Wikipedia. Markus Pössel (talk) 07:03, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Are a company's political donations suitable for inclusion on its former CEO's BLP?[edit]

Three years ago I requested a third opinion on Talk:David M. Cote, and received what I felt was a very well-thought out and measured response. I've since been unable to gain any real traction with implementing the necessary changes (in part due to my COI). I later requested mediation between the editor who added the content that I felt was unsuitable and myself, but he rejected that request. Another editor removed the content entirely, but it was later restored. I requested an edit to move the content to Honeywell instead, by that request was deferred with the placement of a split and merge template. I also tried reaching out on the BLP Noticeboard but got no responses there either. At this point I'd just like to reach a real consensus on the issue. Is it appropriate to include material regarding a company's political donations under a CEO's tenure on his BLP? It seems to me that it unfairly implies that the CEO was directly responsible for the rise in political donations.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 22:44, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

So, you should be posting the question more neutrally, and not pushing people to answer in a given direction. That said, I agree with you, unles it canbe shown that the donations were at the personal direction of the CEO (in which case there should be sourcing that says that, and in which case we can say he directed it as well), then it is not appropriate for their BLP article - in general. However, if a majority of RS report that, especially in a more biographical context (as opposed to just reporting the donation when it happened), then it may be appropriate, but there should be multiple sources clearly indicating the notability of the CEO in relationship to the donation ResultingConstant (talk) 00:49, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
This would be better raised at WP:BLPN. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:24, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@ResultingConstant: I wanted to be open about my conflict of interest and give as much context as possible, I'm sorry if I came across as biased in my question. That said, given the lack of evidence demonstrating an explicit link between Cote and these political donations by Honeywell, how would you recommend proceeding from here? I don't want to make any direct edits given my COI. I do think, as I mentioned above, I think it would be suitable for inclusion on the Honeywell article. Would you be willing to collaborate on this, or if not, refer me to someone who might have an interest?
@NinjaRobotPirate: To what extent do you agree with ResultingConstant's assessment? I agree that this would be more suitable at WP:BLPN. For your reference here's the original posting I made there, but it got no response. Is there anywhere else I could take this question?--FacultiesIntact (talk) 19:18, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
I haven't really looked at it. If dispute resolution failed and nobody responded at BLPN, you can try a request for comments. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 21:59, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Lou Wills Hildreth[edit]

Could someone please double-check if the Southern Gospel Museum and Hall of Fame and the Gospel Music Hall of Fame are the same entity and if so, why Lou Wills Hildreth is listed as inducted in 2007 and 2005 please?Zigzig20s (talk) 09:12, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Get ready for November with Women in Red![edit]

Women in Red logo.svg
Three new topics for WiR's online editathons in November, two of them supporting other initiatives

New: Religion Deceased politicians Asia

Continuing: #1day1woman Global Initiative

Latest headlines, news, and views on the Women in Red talkpage (Join the conversation!):

(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC) via MassMessaging

RfC on WikiProject Georgetown University proposal[edit]

Discussion is listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Georgetown University. Ergo Sum 22:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Tom Pryce nationality[edit]

There is a discussion concerning Tom Pryce, a featured article associated with this project, taking place at Talk:Tom Pryce#Nationality in infobox for those interested. -- DeFacto (talk). 08:34, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Serkan Golge[edit]

NASA MSFC Employee Tries To Make Serkan Golge's Past Disappear This looks very much like somebody should keep an eye on that page. --Stone (talk) 20:14, 18 October 2018 (UTC)