Talk:John Rex

message: This article needs looking at - here are some suggestions. Is he British or South African? If he is a Brit, then why is he described as a SA scholar. Details of date and place of birth would help.
References to his (published?!) work re race relations is vital, since his notability may depend on it, and the posts he held at University would be useful. A citation for the comment regarding "both radical and scientific" should be given. What "Labour Party" election does this refer to? Is this election as an officer within the party, or as a candidate for the party in a local/national election? Lastly, pertinent biographical info would help as well - then we (you actually, this is my contribution) can move onto categories!LessHeard vanU 21:16, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I think the article is now at a start standard - but more needs doing! A summary of the honorific titles and professorships would be handy, as would any further bio details. Also, the bibliography needs looking at - ISBN Numbers, publishers and dates etc.
Also, I would like to suggest that User:84.251.88.222 gets themselves a wiki account - you have done some good work and you may like to help around the place. It would also make it easier to communicate. LessHeard vanU 20:17, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am considering re-introducing the Wikify template. There is now a lot of good information, but the article doesn't look to be in the best format. By putting the template in a new editor will hopefully have a look (with fresh eyes - I am now perhaps not objective enough) and edit the article to Wikipedia standards. I'll wait a couple of days before proceeding, so having the tag back doesn't surprise/upset folks.LessHeard vanU 16:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I simply mean to say I will re-introduce the wikify template. Please feel free to include the "appreciation" text below back into the article text (remember, Wikipedia can be edited by anyone!). When I get access to a computer of an evening again (looks like the week after next) I may be able to do more than just make suggestions.LessHeard vanU 13:57, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed Wikify tag. 

message: Alright, so I think there's two things that have to be looked at for rewriting this article:
#Compile the sources. These are absolutely crucial since without them we won't be able to compile a "References" or "Notes" section. Any claims that involve opinions, comparisons to other works, critical views, etc, must have a footnote. The citation system here is admitedly awkward, so I'll be happy to answer questions about it.
#The Manual of style, which will cover the format of the article and what the proper (and neutral) tone should be. As an encyclopedia article, everything should be succinct and to the point- we need to know who he is, what he did, and why it matters. Knowing this will make the article much easier to write and edit in the long run
As for actually restructuring the article, it will need to have well-defined sections. Something like this:
 John Rex (b. 1925) was sociologist known for (stuff). This section
 should be very quick and to the point, as to summarize the rest of the article.
 ==Biography==
 Rex was born in South Africa in (go in a bit further, marriage, family, etc)
 This section can also contain information on how his life influenced his work
 ==Career==
 Say what he actually did. This section doesn't necessarily have to be called
 "career" either. This can have subsections to describe aspects of his career
 (educational/political/as an author/etc)
 ==Publications==
 ===Books===
 List of books. If he has a lot, just list the important ones.
 ===Articles===
 List of articles or minor works. Same as above.
 ==Footnotes==
 ==References==
 ==External links==
 (if available, a few external links that might provide further reading)
This ought to provide a rough outline, which of course does not have to be strictly adhered to. As noted on my talk page, I only have partial access to a computer right now, so I can't dedicate as much time as I'd like to to this article. --Wafulz 20:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewriting this article

message: An attempt was made to remove the basic uncontroversial facts from the article, on the grounds that they were not specifically sourced. This was of course inappropriate , as Wikipedia does not require online quotations, unless there is some reason to challenge the facts, and good biographical 3rd party sources were provided, and so I restored it.. Some apparently unsourced and possibly controversial opinion  was also removed, but I did not restore that. I also checked that some of the remaining opinion was specifically attributed, as is necessary.    DGG ( talk ) 05:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: further problems