Talk:Margaret Wertheim

message: You can claim to be whoever you wish, but if you're going to submit copyright text, we need written authorization. Because this paragraph does not seem to be a copyright violation, I moved it from temp to the main article space. (Someone may still want to check for a copyvio; I didn't do a search.) --Fang Aili talk 15:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyright

message: Attempting to expand and improve upon existing article. Here are some potential bibliographic sources: 
- https://www.pbs.org/faithandreason/bio/margaret-body.html 
- https://www.edge.org/memberbio/margaret_wertheim 
- https://bigthink.com/in-their-own-words/im-amazed-by-the-sheer-tenacity-of-outsider-science 
- https://www.guernicamag.com/at-home-in-the-universe/ 
- New Scientist, 16 Sept. 1995, Vol.147(1995), pp.44-44 
- Bomb, Summer, 2014, Issue 128, p.113-115 
- The Guardian, March 13, 1997, p.T6(2) 
- Resources for Feminist Research, Vol.25(1), p.47 
- The Spectator The spectator.,1997, Vol.278(8796), p.31
JamieLynexander (talk) 02:30, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliographic Sources 

message: Utilizing the "Wikipedia Assignment Assessment", Meganjage and JamieLynexander intend to edit, improve, and update the article on Margaret Wertheim. 
1. Lead Section: The "Introductory" sentence states the topic of the article, though it could be more concise/direct. We will revise the "Introductory sentence to include more information. The "Summary" summarizes most major points, but misses one or more important aspects. Additional information is required in order for the article to be complete. The "Context" of the "Lead Section" includes some information that is not present in the body of the article. We will revise the "Lead Section" to coordinate better with the bulk of the article.
2. Article: The "Organization" of headings and subheadings is clear with appropriate transitions and clear language/grammar. The "Content" covers some of the assigned topic area. We will include additional information not currently covered in the article. The article presents balanced coverage without favoring one side unduly. The "Tone" is neutral and appropriate for an encyclopedia audience. More "Images" with clear and concise captions could improve the reader's understanding of the topic. We will include additional imagery to the existing article.
3. References: For the "Citations" there are a few unsourced paragraphs or sections. Some of the article is plagiarized and must be corrected and/or cited. The article uses mostly good "Sources", but includes some lower-quality sources. We will attempt to eliminate lower-quality sources. Most "References" include a completely filled-out citation template or are otherwise complete. 
4. Existing Article: "New Sections" will be comprehensive and will not duplicate other sections. The "Re-organization" of the article will cover the topic in an organized, logical fashion. The key "Gaps" will be filled. "Smaller Additions" will be added to relevant sections of the article.
JamieLynexander (talk) 17:56, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Revision 

message: Jamie and Megan,
Your four goals for improving the article look good! Below I included some additional thoughts. 
1. Have you considered updating the picture to something more like a headshot and using the picture of Margaret talking at the TED conference in a later section? 
2. Are you planning to move the statement about her being a twin? That piece of information doesn't seem integral to the introduction. 
Meghancmalloy (talk) 04:42, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Hi Jamie, 
I just have some quick feedback on your article about Margaret Wertheim.
I think the article has good structure, it just needs to be fleshed out. The section that needs work and more information/background/sources especially is the biography on Margaret Wertheim; I think this can be way more developed.
The section about her education and research also needs more work. Currently this section, regarding two very important parts of her life and contribution to STEM, is one sentence. I would look more into the courses she took that prepared her for her career in STEM and what she did/what projects she worked on with that education.
The books, references, and external link sections look good.
Overall, since the assignment is to edit a page about a women/person of color in STEM, I would suggest focusing more on building Margaret Wertheim's background, education, and research for a stronger article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Riuliano (talk • contribs) 07:33, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion