Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 34

Archive 30

←

Archive 32

Archive 33

Archive 34

Archive 35

Archive 36

→

Archive 40

Mel Smith

He was on a BBC programme tonight apparently, with slurred speech - I have tidied up the page a little and inserted citation requests, I thought I'd bring it to this project's attention in case it gets plenty of page views over the next few days. Parrot of Doom (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that's the right word - he sounded as though he had some sort of nasal condition, rather then as "slurred" might imply, being drunk. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 16:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Governors of Russian America, bios needed

There is a listing of Governors of the Russian-American Company on the company page, with half a dozen or so in need of bio articles; my intention is to write more of a paragraph on the governors and migrate the list to its own list-page, and also to create a Category:Governors of Russian America category, but it would help to have the missing bios made, if someone here would care to indulge; also some of the existing articles, like Furuhjelm's, need references; even Russian-language ones would do. Thanks.Skookum1 (talk) 15:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Please participate in Yip Pin Xiu's peer review

Greetings, members of this WikiProject! Feel like reading and reviewing an interesting biography? I wrote an article about Yip Pin Xiu, a disabled Singaporean swimmer who won two Paralympic medals and set two world records. The article deserves GA status and I have filed a PR in preparation for a GA nomination. Since she is a minor and not a public figure, I am particularly concerned about BLP issues. So pelase help by giving the article a thorough review! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 02:57, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Straw poll on 'trial' implementation of FlaggedRevisions

The discussion on the implementation of a 'trial' configuration of FlaggedRevisions on en.wiki has now reached the 'straw poll' stage. All editors are invited to read the proposal and discussion and to participate in the straw poll. Happy‑melon 18:05, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Request For Comment On Article

There's a request for comment I'm interested in having more opinion in at User_talk:Kopf1988/Ryan_Kopf. Thank you Kopf1988 (talk) 19:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Carmen L. Robinson

I have concerns over the notability of Carmen L. Robinson, an as-yet-not-officially-announced candidate for Mayor in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States. Please read the article and Talk:Carmen L. Robinson and provide your input. I'm torn between taking this to AFD before the official announcement, on the grounds that it being here at that time is an abuse of the project, or leaving it untagged in the hopes that the person will become notable at that time, saving the time and trouble of an AFD. Input from people interested in biography articles would help a lot. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 15:51, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Bosley Crowther

I'm troubled by the article on longtime New York Times film critic Bosley Crowther. Far too much of the article is devoted to an attack on Crowther for his supposed "left-wing" and "pro-Soviet" bias. Indeed, the article at one point states flat-out and without proper attribution that he has such a bias. That obviously has to go, but I think that the entire section devoted to that needs to be cut to the bone. It just seems to me to be a serious violation of WP:WEIGHT but I'd appreciate a second opinion. --Stetsonharry (talk) 20:09, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

John J. Nance

Due to legal threats by JJNCOM (talk · contribs), could someone more familiar with the WP:BLP requirements take a look at this article, and help with cleanup of this one? --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Note: The above request was redundant to one made in the discussion at WP:BLPN#Repeated posting of Defamatory Material, so has been struck out here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

proposing indigenous people's workgroup

I just edited a few tweaks on George Horse-Capture of the Fort Belknap Agency, and there's nothing on the page or in his linked bio to say which of the two tribes on that agency he's a member of (or both?) - Gros Ventre (a branch of the Blackfeet) or Assiniboine (a Siouxan group). I noted he's in the s&a (science & academia) workgroup of WP:Bio; but might I suggest that there be convened a workgroup to address indigenous peoples' bios, since there's so many of them and they have particular categorizing, cultural-sensitivity etc needs. I added {{NorthAmNative}} which of course addresses some of this, but I'm finding lots and lots of "Indian bios" that don't have NorthAmNative on them; maybe the proposed workgroup could be an interface between that project and this one??Skookum1 (talk), 5 January 2009

Persons of colour

I have noticed that in articles about people of colour that their race/ethnicity seems to have greater emphasis compared to articles about white people. I hope I am not the only one to have noticed this and that it is somehow resolved. NorthernThunder (talk) 10:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Mark Wigglesworth

If some editors would like to take a look at Mark Wigglesworth and comment on the discussion there, it might be helpful. Thanks! -- moe.RON ^{Let's talk | done} 00:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Living people

Should also people categorised as "Living people" have {{WPBiography}} on their talk pages? If so, I have a bot that might be able to help. Thanks! - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:02, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Robin Roberts (newscaster)

Someone needs to watch Robin Roberts (newscaster), an IP editor from a rotating IP address in the 75.x.x.x range keeps revising the article into a horrible shape, and making it unreferenced. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 07:45, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

IT appeasrs to be a daily occurance now... Though a new editor from the 202.* range made the change, the change appears the same kind as before, since all section headers were removed. However, the new editor kindly left the infobox in place, unlike the previous 75.* editor. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 14:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Shawon Dunston

I looked the Shawon Dunston page after seeing him mentioned in a New York Times Op-Ed and it's horrible. Full of opinion and unreferenced sources. Most of it should probably be removed. Opinions ? Arleach (talk) 01:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Template:WPBiography

This talk-page template is apparantly not compliant with Template:WikiProjectBannerShell. Would someone who is more savvy with the technicals be able to fix that? Thanks if you can. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 15:13, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems to work fine for me. What is the problem you are having? Road Wizard (talk) 19:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Ha. I'm not sure what I was doing wrong. Maybe I was having a brain fart. Thanks, though. JohnnyPolo24 (talk) 16:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Archiving some of this page

Worth archiving a couple more months' worth I think. Anyone else agree? - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 18:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd suggest setting up auto-archiving using MiszaBot II. This page picks up new discussions so quickly that manual archiving is tiresome. Road Wizard (talk) 19:06, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

I have set up auto-archiving to archive discussions over three weeks old. The bot should be making its first run in the next 24 hours. Road Wizard (talk) 07:51, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Tila Tequila = American?

This has been a long-running dispute on the talk page of Tila's article. I am not quite sure if this is the right place for such an inquiry, but I would like an editor (or several, if that's the case) to drop by and check it out. I want this matter settled, it's a bit annoying how the page is tagged one day and undone, yet redone the next. Thanks in advance. ★Dasani★ 23:23, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Political Party offices

At Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Jack Kemp debate is occurring on the prpriety of including Vice Presidential nominee in his infobox. I have argued that it is considered to be a political party office. It seems to be treated on an equal footing with Republican National Committee/Democratic National Committee Chair, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, Majority Leader (Minority Leader), Whip in many ways and these all seem to be accepted in infoboxes. For example, nominees are included in party Navboxes such as {{Republican Party (United States)}}, {{USDemVicePresNominees}} or {{USDemPresNominees}}, they are included in succession boxes in the political party offices section, and they are included in WP:LEAD. I feel Pres/VP nominee differs from other nominees such as Whip nominee or speaker nominee for this reason. Thus, it seems to me that they should similarly be included in infoboxes. However, I only feel losing nominees should include it in their infoboxes because it is redundant to mention of the respective offices. I am concerned that there is an oppose for not removing something that belongs. Thus, I am bringing the debate to a highly trafficked page for consensus building.

The counterparty in my debate GoodDay (talk · contribs) believes the following would be proper administration of party poitical offices: Keep the following 1] In the Lead: Party chairs, Presidential and VP nominees, House Speaker, Floor leaders & Floor whips. 2] In the Navbox: Party chairs, House Speaker. 3] In the Succession box: House Speaker & 4] In the Infobox: House Speaker. I believe all of these party offices should be included in all of the places at issue. Since his opinion is contrary to current practice and he is opposing my FAC nom for this reason and since this affects hundreds, if not thousands of bio articles, I want to get a consensus where I can find many opinions.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, we have to make sure the decision (whatever it is) is applied equally, to all the biographies-in-question. PS- consistancy on Biography infoboxes are tough to mainetain. GoodDay (talk) 20:36, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

All these, Speaker, Committee Chairman, Whip etc. are elected positions. I would compare a VP nominee to a Senate nominee. If being a nominee is regarded notable enough to get an info box in the first place it should stay on the box even after the person attains the office. In fact, it doesn't, because there is a different quality to being a nominee and an elected or appointed person, where policy and people are influenced. The information is in the lead and at the page bottom anyway, it would only affect people who don't bother reading the lead of an article in the first place. Let's leave it as it is, revamping lots and lots of nominees for federal office when the articles already state them being nominees is imo not necessary. Hekerui (talk) 22:06, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

A VP nominee is not at all like being a Senate nominee. If you picked up a Time article about an 8-term congressman who won his party's nomination to be a Senator the article would not in its opening paragraphs likely say Pol X, former Republican Senate nominee. It would say Congressman X. Pres and VP nominee titles have enough grandeur that they stay with you for life. In WP land, they get you succession boxes, navbox templates, and a blurb in your WP:LEAD. Most Senate nominee articles do not have navboxes for the nomination and many ignore the fact in the LEAD. I don't think an argument about things being in the infobox should come down to whether it is repeating the LEAD. The majority of the infobox should repeat the LEAD. WP debate should not come down to whether it will be hard to do something if it is the right thing. It should come down to what the right thing to do is.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

In fact, it would/should. Because as congressperson you either win the Senate seat or retire. And governors or other people who already have elected positions would have it mentioned as well, it's a big deal to run for Senate. Can we retire "doing the right thing"? It's merely a stylistic question, and the pages are doing alright without it. Hekerui (talk) 11:13, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Adding [Year] Republican/Democratic Presidential and/or Vice Presidential nominee, will bloat those Infoboxes aswell. GoodDay (talk) 15:26, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I view an infobox of bio article as a way to see the highlights of a person's career without having to read the article. For some people, being a VP nominee is the highest achievement of their life. I view this as the case for Kemp, Palin, and several others. How can you exclude the most important highlight of a person's career? There are many rules on WP:N, like most athletes do not merit a page unless they have competed at the highest level, bands don't merit pages unless they charted, etc. I am saying that with nominees, I think the highest level (Pres/VP) still merits an infobox section. Other levels may not in general, but on a case by case basis they may.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:17, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I disagree: The Infobox of those articles-in-question, are used for holding office (thus the sub-titles In Office). Palin's highest office (as of 2009) is Governor of Alaska & Kemp's highest office was United States Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. -- GoodDay (talk)

Would we (for example) add to Mitt Romney's infobox, Candidate for the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination? Ya see folks, being nominated for an office & actually holding an office, are seperate things. GoodDay (talk) 17:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

If the Ticket had been McCain/Romney or Romney/Palin, I would be for adding it. He never held the Republican party office of Republican nominee for president however as Palin and Kemp have. When you say Palin, Kemp never held the party political office of nominee, is that why you think they should be removed from the succession boxes too?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:16, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) I'm saying nominee should be removed from the Infoboxes, as it's not an office, but merely a nomination for an office. GoodDay (talk) 23:46, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I am just confused. If it does not belong in the infobox because it is not an office, why do most of these guys have it in their succession boxes as a party office. Either it is an office for the infobox and succession box or it is not for both.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:55, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

It's very possible that it's only grouped as party office for convenience, as there is no source presented for it being an actual office other than Wikipedia. The "office" is likely not an official office, it's merely used as a synonym for "position" or out of a lack of a good word for the heading of the infobox. That's Ockham's razor to me. HUD is his latest federal job, let's keep it at the top of the infobox. Also, how many people don't bother reading two sentences after searching for it? Hekerui (talk) 02:06, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I just added {{tl:NYRepresentatives}} to all the pages it includes for everyone who has ever been a congressman for New York. I have also done Illinois and Louisiana. I did not read any pages as I added them. I scanned the infoboxes as I paged down to the proper place to put th template. The infobox is the place for a really quick scan. After that I go to the WP:LEAD for slightly more detailed reveiw. A lot of times I just scan infoboxes because if it isn't in the infobox, it shouldn't be important, IMO (since I believe if it is important it should be in the infobox).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:53, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Additionally, your answer essentially says, I can not make any reasonable argument why it should be in a succession box and not an infobox. It seems that everything you have said against it being in the infobox would count against it being in a succession box.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:57, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Without any evidence for it actually being an office, yes. :-) Hekerui (talk) 10:35, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

I apologize I realize you think it should be removed from both. However, the WP common practice seems to be that if it is an office it is belongs in succession boxes because it is information that is important enough that it should be available at a glance but not infoboxes. If it is not an office, it is an important enough life event that it should be considered of equal import to real offices in terms of need to be legible at a glance for succession boxes but infoboxes. I think there should be a change either to add it to infoboxes or remove it from succession boxes unless someone can explain something else I do not understand.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:25, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Current image of Milan Kundera on Wikipedia

Hello. I don´t believe, that the person on the photo in Kundera´s article is really him. Here [1] [2] [3] [4] you can find some photos of him, and here is a French interview with Kundera from 1968. Our photo is from 1954 (fourteen years earlier than the video) - Kundera was 25 years old in that time, and that person looks older... In my opinion, the image bears no resemblance to Milan Kundera. Can someone help me to resolve this, please? Thanks --Vejvančický (talk) 08:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Charles Stirling

Charles Stirling was my 3 x great grandfather. This article was originally taken from my post in the Clan Stirling website dated August 20, 2002 (one of several posted that date), and had a link citing it. It has subsequently been edited and documented to Pamela Statham-Drew's book on Sir James Stirling, Charles's nephew. The book I cited, The Stirlings of Cadder is listed as a work not consulted, presumably because it is a rare book and none of the WikiProject editors have seen a copy. I do have a copy, and would be happy to provide a photocopy of the title page and the pages on Charles, if that would be helpful (and if I could figure out how to do it).

The main thing that concerns me is the picture. You have no documentation whatsoever for the picture, which originally came from the Clan Stirling site cited above. You have no way of knowing that it is Charles Stirling. I believe it is him, because the photo I have (which I scanned and uploaded to Clan Stirling) has my great-grandmother's writing on the back saying "For Nina - Her Great-Grandfather Stirling Admiral Charles Stirling. Taken from a painting probably in the possession of Grote Stirling, M.P. Kelowna, B.C." Nina was my grandmother, Nina Stirling Freeman. I have never seen the original painting, nor have I been able to discover anyone who has or what has become of it. The image I uploaded is cropped, and I could, if you like, provide the full image.
AriesFool(talk) 05:54, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

Proofreading complete for Frederick Bianchi, Duke of Casalanza - please revise rating

Hello,
I have completed the revision of the article above, which was rated a stub before my revision. I believe the in-line referencing I've provided should suffice to improve its rating.
Thank you for reconsidering the article and updating the classification.
--Campelli (talk) 05:49, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion For A Bot

I am resolving the conflicts in the Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts. While I am at it I am also doing a little bit of housekeeping such as nesting when either there are three or more banners or if the two banners automatically nest and putting this banner on top if the person is living so that the BLP banner is on top of everything. After all the non-trivial conflicts have been resolved I will more on to Category:Biography articles without listas parameter.

I just realized that I have not been checking the main page of each article to see if the DEFAULTSORT exists and matches the listas value. This is where I think a bot could be useful if what I have in mind is possible.

What I have in mind is for the bot to check all the Biography articles with listas parameter and do the audit that I have not been doing on the pages I have repaired.

By the way, I very much appreciate how well behaved this project's banner is. This banner does not need either the BannerShell or the Banners template to nest if the nested value is yes. There are some others that are equally well behaved but I can never remember which ones they are when I need to remember. Under the right combination of banners I only need to make certain that every banner has its nested value as yes, as well as a valid value for the listas parameter, and all the banners are nested nicely. Also, this banner does not explode if it resets the listas parameter to the PAGENAME as the WP Greece banner occasionally does. As an added bonus, if this banner has living set to yes the BLP is not needed.

Does my suggestion make sense?

JimCubb (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I am working on this with the WP:AWB team. -- Mjquin_id (talk) 06:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Music bands

Why are there so many rock bands under WPBIO? Can we drop the band and just handle the people? -- Mjquin_id (talk) 06:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Hear! Hear! We have players of professional sports but we do not have the teams. We have members of the US Congress but we do not have the Congresses. We have the Canadian Ministers but we do not have the Canadian Ministries.

JimCubb (talk) 18:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Michael Schumacher under GA review

Hello there, the article Michael Schumacher which falls under the auspices of this Wikiproject, has come under review as part of GA Sweeps and a number of problems have been identified and listed on the talk page. If these problems have not begun to be addressed by seven days from this notice, the article will be delisted from GA and will have to go through the WP:GAN process all over again to regain its status once improvements have been made. If you have any questions, please drop me a line.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Carl Lewis under GA review

Hello there, the article Carl Lewis which falls under the auspices of this Wikiproject, has come under review as part of GA Sweeps and a number of problems have been identified and listed on the talk page. If these problems have not begun to be addressed by seven days from this notice, the article will be delisted from GA and will have to go through the WP:GAN process all over again to regain its status once improvements have been made. If you have any questions, please drop me a line.--Jackyd101 (talk) 22:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion sorting

It is currently the case that AfD discussions for the biography articles of filmmakers and such are listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Film; I believe it would be prudent to relocate such discussions to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and actresses and rename that page to Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and filmmakers. This would be of benefit to both WP:FILM, as such articles do not fall within this project's scope, and WP:BIOGRAPHY, who do not currently include such discussions on their Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Deletion sorting page.

Since I am posting this same comment at WT:FILM, WT:BIOGRAPHY and WT:FILMBIO, can any comments please be left at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting#Proposed refocus of Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Actors and actresses where I have already raised the issue, so it isn't being discussed in four different places. PC78 (talk) 13:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

This change has now been made. PC78 (talk) 14:51, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Samuel Fuller

I'm currently doing a massive expansion of the article for White Dog, the last American film directed by noted B-movie director Samuel Fuller. In my work on the article, I've found a ton of sources about Fuller himself. I'm not fond of doing Biography articles myself, I looked to see if there was an active editor who might have use for the sources and found none. I was wondering if anyone from the Biography project might want to take on expanding and cleaning up his article? If so, I'd be happy to forward all of the sources I've pulled from various paper archives to assist in the work. I have eight in PDF form, including several multi page spread, all WP:RS, and there are also quite a bit in the Criterion Collection site for the film. Can also provide any info on the DVD's many special features about its controversial history once I get it, and have access to quite a few additional paper sources that didn't mention the film. With the sourcing, I'd imagine an experienced editor here could get the Fuller article to GA level relatively quickly. Any takers? -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:58, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

I'd suggest posting this at Wikiproject Films. I'm a bit of a novice, but if no one more experienced is interested I certainly would be. Thanks, Stetsonharry (talk) 00:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I debated it, but Films specifically doesn't cover biographies, though so not sure anyone would have any interest in doing that kind of work.-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh, au contraire sir. Wikiproject Films (specifically WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers) has actor/director/secreenwriter biographies under its aegis, as can be seen from the talk pages of many film biographies. We are all film buffs, Fuller is a notable director, and I am sure your post will get a good reception. I personally am quite a fan. I'd say "yes" to your offer myself, as I said, but I wanted to give my elders a crack at it. Stetsonharry (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Ma'am :P And Actors/Filmmakers is a separate project (from Films itself "However, for present organizational reasons (as of October 2007), the project does not include articles about actors, directors and filmmakers; those are in the scope of the Biography WikiProject, most especially the Actors and Filmmakers and Screenwriters projects thereof"). I forgot about Filmmakers though so will cross post there as well. :) -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 23:21, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Hey, you're right on both points. I had always assumed the two are one and the same. Just proves my point about being a novice. Please let me know if you don't get any nibbles there, as I'd really like to see those materials you've gathered. Thanks again, Stetsonharry (talk) 18:30, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Milestone announcements

Hello there members of WikiProject Biography! As one of the most active WikiProjects, I would really like your comments and help regarding a bot I'm designing. In essence, the idea is to reinvigorate the Wikipedia Announcements page by letting a bot do all the hard work. All the respective WikiProjects will have to do is to let me know:

• that they want milestones their project has reached to appear on the page
• what indicator the bot should used for "counting" the number of articles
• what those milestones should be

Although it's only at early stage, it would be great to be able to get a few projects onside (or not) for now, and get their details so dry-runs can be carried out. So, what about it? (I will be watching this page, but still best to ping my user to let me know you've replied.)

Thanks! - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 17:56, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

FAR for Robert A. Heinlein

I have nominated Robert A. Heinlein for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --Wehwalt (talk) 20:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)