Talk:Romance Writers of America

message: I'm not tied to any specific heading for the last section on the article, but I don't think Implosion works. I haven't seen it used in any of the reporting on this story.When I do a search on "Romance Writers of America", news feed view, these are the headlines and ledes at the top of my search results, and how they describe the situation:
*(headline) 'A lack of transparency, accountability, empathy, and sincerity' created race and diversity 'firestorm' for Romance Writers of America
*(lede) "The Romance Writers of America, grappling with the backlash to a racism dispute..."
*(headline) Romance Writers of America cancels annual RITA awards contest amid racism controversy
*(headline) As racism scandal escalates, Romance Writers of America board president resigns
*(lede) "The president and executive director of the trade organization, which is reeling from disputes involving racism and diversity..."
*(lede) "The Romance Writers of America ended 2019 reeling from the backlash to its handling of a racism accusation."
So we have firestorm, racism dispute, racism controversy, racism scandal, and racism accusation. I think we can come up with an appropriate section heading that reflects WP:RS. Nearly every news report on it includes racism. Thoughts on alternative headers? Schazjmd (talk) 21:52, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm open to a different section heading (this isn't my favorite either), but I don't want to use "controversy".  While the initial articles covered this as a controversy or firestorm, the tone is shifting.  It's no longer just about the initial dispute, but more about what it means for the organization now that publishers and authors are abandoning it and they can't keep a Board.  What if we change it to "Diversity and Inclusionissues" and expand with information about the RITAsoWhite issues from a few years ago?  It's all connected. Karanacs (talk) 21:15, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I like "Diversity and inclusion issues" better than "implosion" or "controversy", but does that minimize the emphasis all the sources are putting on "racism"? How about "Diversity and racism issues"? Schazjmd (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

text: Adding: are this Guardian article and this NPR interview good sources for RITAsoWhite? I didn't get RS hits on "RITAsoWhite" and am not at all familiar with this org's history, so wanted to confirm that these are about the issues you're referring to. Schazjmd (talk) 21:59, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: D&I does include racism and the backlash against those who call it out.  This is really a LOT bigger deal than just Milan's comments.  Recent articles are doing a better job at adding the context (and a Jezebel headline today talks about the organization imploding).  I think that's normal as a story progresses. Karanacs (talk) 22:29, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The section is much stronger now, thanks! Schazjmd (talk) 22:59, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section heading for current difficulties that RWA is facing 

message: 'PAN' stands for Published Author Network. But you haven't told us what 'PRO' stands for. Valetude (talk) 23:32, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , it doesn't stand for anything. Their PRO "track" is for authors who have completed a manuscript but not yet published (as the article explains). Schazjmd (talk) 23:41, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I knew which category it catered for. But it still looks like a mistake to the first-time reader. Might be good if it did stand for something. Valetude (talk) 23:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that's up to the RWA. :) Schazjmd (talk) 23:59, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  'PRO' is what?