Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 12

message: Hi. I recently nominated a bio at afd. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Joe_Sanchez. Primary editor of the article is User:Brentwood. This also alerted me to article Sarah Robbins, a colleague in the same field. Big contributor to this article is User:Typewriter. In both cases there are legitimate concerns about self promotion of the subjects. This needs to be investigated more thoroughly, but BPLs really aren't my field of expertise. (i'm quickly learning that :D ). Is there someone or someplace that can assist in reviewing both users edits, and the notability of the articles in question ??? --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 00:34, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there's some policy or guideline pages (do these turn red? WP:AUTO, WP:VANITY, WP:BIO of course). I think you did right to send to AFD. That's probably the best place for such things to be discussed (we tend to "discuss" rather than "investigate" ;)) --kingboyk 00:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In the mean time, Typewriter has revealed himself as being Mark Bell (www.storygeek.com), a close associate of Sarah, "who takes care of her page". Mark believes that Brentwood might have previously edited anonymously as 24.155.108.14 and tried to get the page on Sarah deleted as a non-notable subject, before creating the Sanchez article as user Brentwood. I don't know how much of the last stuff is true, but i do believe Typewriter is Mark Bell. I also think that Sarah might actually be notable, I haven't really looked into it yet closely enough. The article (in both cases) are a horrid of course. --TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 01:14, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self promotion articles ? 

message: Some of the members of the various work groups might want to go over the list of FA and GA articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Recognized content. I personally think that a lot of the articles listed as "not yet assigned to a group" clearly fall within the scope of one or more work group, and it would probably be beneficial for everyone if they were indicated as such. John Carter 22:56, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Work group articles 

message: The following two recent deletion nominations by me may be of interest to members of this project, and I'm interested in soliciting opinion from editors who work on biographies of living persons.  I have nominated both because at present they completely lack reliable sources.
* Jeffrey St. Clair
* Kenny Benkowski
The Kenny Benkowski article presently seems to be a near orphan: only one other article, about another minor "jobber" wrestler, links to it.  The Jeffrey St. Clair article may be salvageable if only someone will undertake the task. --Tony Sidaway 18:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Two deletion nominations

message: Further to this, a suggestion has been made on the admins' noticeboard for an extension to the  ("proposed deletion") system to cover bios of living people. Feel free to comment whether or not you're an admin. --kingboyk 19:20, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Deletion of long-term unsourced articles

message: I populated this on an experimental basis a couple of months ago to see if anyone would be interested in working through these, and the indications don't look too good.  Would it be more sensible to do this on a per work group basis?  e.g. , , etc, etc.  (The source of these would be bot-population from topical stub types, with no "permanent" categories, plus whatever others got tossed in there by other means.)  There's also a more general discussion on this at WikiProject Categories/uncategorized.  Alai 05:15, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite a lot of those are eminently deletable.  Having been neglected for some time, tagged to hell and back, if they're still orphaned and unsourced it's time to let them go. --Tony Sidaway 08:17, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I clicked on 3 or 4 at random and they all seemed surprisingly notable. Not much of a sample, I know, but it's certainly not 100% cruft. --kingboyk 11:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Perhaps somebody with AWB/a bot could trawl through them, and get them tagged with the necessary templates (some of which will no doubt be prod or AFD)? I'm not sure whether categorising per workgroup would help, but certainly you're doing a worthwhile job getting these flagged. --kingboyk 11:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't do automated browsing, but I've been slowly working my way through them. --Tony Sidaway 13:46, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Deleted" works just as well for me as "categorised", for progress on that front.  I'll check back in a while and see if there's further input on whether to tag these by WG, en masse into the present category, or not at all.  Alai 06:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  {{cl|uncategorised people}} 

message: There has been an ongoing discussion on the talk pages of both articles as to whether the subject should be described as being a convert to Christianity, and/or whether his name should be listed on the List above. A formal request for comment has been made for outside input. Please go to Talk:List of converts to Christianity#Request for comment to take part in the centralized discussion there. Thank you. John Carter 00:38, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RFC: [[Bob Dylan]] on [[List of converts to Christianity]] 

message: One of the executive officers in Scotland is up for afd Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Robert_Arbuthnot_%28auditor%29. Help in improving this stub would be valued. - Kittybrewster  (talk) 02:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Robert Arbuthnot (auditor)

message: An experienced editor should most certainly take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Crist .
It would make an excellent campaign brochure but does a sad discredit to Wikipedia.
Ryvr 01:51, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: actually struck me as boring, and therefore would not make a good campaign brochure. 38.100.34.2 16:29, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV and Charlie_Crist (Governor of Florida) 

message: There is no policy to say infoboxes must be placed on a biography, and no agreement that it is better if they always are (at least some people disagree). I've tweeked the wording to avoid the impression that there's a policy here. Infoboxes are optional and should be used at the user's digression, if there's a disagreement then it should be decided by consensus of those working on the particular article, and on the basis of the best arrangement of information on that particular article.--Docga pox on the boxes 21:53, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infoboxes 

message: I happened across the web site for the Library of Congress Prints and Photographs Division today, and thought I'd mention it as a possible bio resource.  Among the many links: selected portraits of famous people from the Library's collection.  The page notes that "except where otherwise noted, the Library of Congress is unaware of any copyright or donor restrictions on the use of the images (in cases where permission from a rights holder is clearly required, links to jpeg and tiff files are not provided and only a small reference image appears)."  Most, but not all the portraits, are Americans; I found Balboa, Edmund Burke, Marconi, and Yeats.  — OtherDave 11:04, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is indeed a good resource. It is best to check dates though and, as always, check the copyright issues carefully. Carcharoth 12:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images from the Library of Congress 

message: Charles I of England has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charles I of England FAR 

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#Banner for a set of unanswered questions. I'm afraid I rather hijacked that thread, and the original poster has rightly pointed out that his original questions haven't been answered yet. Sorry about that! I don't know the answers, so if anyone can help out, that would be great. Carcharoth 23:17, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Questions now being answered. Thanks! :-) Carcharoth 12:27, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unanswered questions in previous section 

message: What do you think about this diagram ? R/W access to this diagram is available to interested Wikipedians on request. Kpjas 07:12, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very pretty, and really quite interesting. Could you tell me more about it please? --kingboyk 22:22, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I am writing a blog post in Polish (for the Polish Wikipedia community) about the Biography WikiProject and it occured to me that some graphical diagram would  illustrate  better how complex and extensive project it is. The diagram obviously needs to be expanded further but I didn't want to compromise its readability. Kpjas 08:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, that's very interesting, thanks. Please keep us updated on this, it would be interesting to see what the Polish Wikipedia community make of it. --kingboyk 12:03, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diagram 

message: Hello,
What do folks think about adding the"Cause of Death" to biography Infoboxes?
-- Michael David 21:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding Cause of Death to Infobox 

message: We really need one or two more WPPbiography admins, in particular people who are proficient in advanced template syntax and who can sensibly edit our protected template, . I know we've had at least 2 active members run for adminship recently but alas neither were promoted (I think the earlier of the two will be able to run again soon and likely get support this time; iirc I didn't support last time because of experience).
If this sounds like you and you're willing to offer some of your free time to Wikipedia to help out as an admin, please drop a line here. We can talk about a WikiProject endorsement. I might even nominate you if you're an excellent candidate (not that a nom from me has any extra kudos, alas). --kingboyk 12:59, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need more admins - any interested parties? 

message: There are currently several hundred biography articles requested at WP:WANTED.  Just the top ten requests represent 830 links on 664 pages (in mainspace alone, not even counting links from inside templates.)
* Timothy_Björklund (69 links on 69 pages)
* David_Elsworth (88 links on 67 pages)
* Ray_Cochrane (82 links on 67 pages)
* Poul_Jensen_(astronomer) (100 links on 66 pages)
* Geoff_Wragg (79 links on 60 pages)
* Ian_Balding (73 links on 57 pages)
* John_Hore (55 links on 55 pages)
**2 individuals linked: (1690 - 1762) engineer for the [[[Kennet and Avon Canal]]]. (1907-1979) New Zealand rugby union player. Also a New Zealand country singer.Circeus 20:40, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I updated Sapphic's list, since three articles were created in three days. -- KrakatoaKatie 08:12, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

text: The numbers should be no cause for concern. There's already some 400,000 biographies on Wikipedia, representing about a quarter of all articles. It's quite reasonable to expect at least a quarter of requests to be for biographies, and not reasonable to expect this WikiProject to write them :) If folks want to work on article requests, they'll come to you. --kingboyk 11:15, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:WANTED|Most wanted articles]] 

message: Mordechai Vanunu has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
LuciferMorgan 18:49, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mordechai Vanunu FAR

message: Being bold and not necessarily thoughtful, I have proposed five new projects relating to Biography on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals page, regarding "Religious figures", "Comics creators", "Business people", "Lawyers," and "Writers". I am also contacting the extant WikiProjects relating to the general subjects involved. With any luck, we may see some action regarding potential membership in these groups shortly. If of course any member of this project thinks these proposals are not well thought out, then I very much encourage them to say as much on that page so that there comments can be reviewed and, if found to be substantive, acted upon. Thank you. John Carter 16:08, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sensible scope, and some participants, that's all that's needed. These seem to be fine wrt the first point. --kingboyk 17:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Not sure about the comics though; seems a bit narrow in scope. --kingboyk 12:01, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I acknowledge the narrow scope of that proposed group. Based on a rough count, there seem to be about 2000 biography articles which might be covered by that group, if we count both western and eastern comics. My only real point for proposing it was that it seemed to me to be related to a fairly large and active project, the Comics project, and also probably be a rather isolated "niche" within the arts and entertainment field. John Carter 01:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd support it if they're on board, certainly; if they're not I'd oppose (because it's too specialist for us unless it's a collaboration, I feel). --kingboyk 01:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I certainly would think it would need to have some sort of official approval from the members of the Comics project before going forward as well. If this, or any of the other possible "joint" proposals get the 5 members sought, I would expect to specifically contact the relevent other project to get their approval and input. If neither is received in any instance, then it might clearly be seen as overstepping our own bounds, and I don't think that is at all a good idea. John Carter 01:39, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed subprojects 

message: Editors interested in the use of biographical infoboxes may like to see the recent edits to John Coolidge Adams, Michael Nyman, Steve Reich and Philip Glass; and their talk pages. Andy Mabbett 20:50, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Stop forum-shopping, Mabbett. --Folantin 20:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

text: To put this in context, there is a broad consensus at WikiProject Opera and WikiProject Composers not to use infoboxes on these articles.  Andy Mabbett (see his block log) has been engaging in an uncivil edit war over this since late April.  See discussion here, here, here, and here. Fireplace 20:58, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I made sure to express my request for third-party opinion in neutral terms. You've chosen to respond with an ad-hominem attack. Andy Mabbett 10:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: As many editors have already explained in past discussions on WikiProject Composers and the WikiProject Opera it is essential that ancillary information (such as infoboxes) matches the content of articles. Unfortunately Andy Mabbett doesn't accept this and thinks it is the responsibility of other editors to deal with any problems caused by infoboxes - while being obligated to retain them - by Andy Mabbett! Extraordinary! -- Kleinzach 00:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Unfortunately Andy Mabbett doesn't accept this..." - that's a bare-faced lie. Andy Mabbett 10:54, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Composers 

message: I was looking at the list of biographies, and I was wondering if we really need to have everyone who uses this to write a biography about themselves.  I think we should set limits on what kind of people biographies can be posted about.
207.6.115.84 00:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's called Wikipedia:Notability (people). cheers! Circeus 00:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do we need so many biographies? 

message: Is the convention to list the political entity that existed at the time of birth (along with its old flag) or to list the political entity currently existing for the birthplace entry in the infobox?--Jiang 02:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about birthplaces in infoboxes 

message: Tony Blair has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tony Blair FAR 

message: Where do activists get filed? I gave  to Susan B. Anthony, Alice Paul, and Lucy Burns, all of whom were activists (in these three cases, for women's sufferage). But I'm a bit wary of assigning them to the Politics and government work group, which seems to be about office-holding politicians. So, what is done about activists?  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 18:20, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope someone with more experience shows up to either pat me on the back or kick me somewhat lower for potentially answering out of turn. But I do notice that failed office candidates tend to get included in the politics work group as well. On that basis, although most of the articles in that group are about officeholders, I think the scope of the group is supposed to include those who lead political parties and other movements as well. On that basis, I think they would fall within the politicians work group. John Carter 19:10, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ...And in the case of suffrage actavists, the're trying to get the right to vote. I'll start assigning.  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 20:36, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with that. Anybody who is notable because of their involvement in politics should be in the group, imho. Of course the ideal is that every bio would be in at least one workgroup... --kingboyk 18:18, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: A Question of Assignment

message: Does anyone know of a barnstar appropriate for editors who do exceptional work in the field of biography? John Carter 15:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't know of one, perhaps you could make one or request one? It would be a nice idea for sure. --kingboyk 18:16, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biography barnstar? 

message: Should record producers like Conny Plank or Manfred Eicher go into arts and entertainment, musicians, or both? Cheers, BNutzer 18:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not really sure. I personally would put them into musicians. --kingboyk 18:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was my first impulse, too. Any others' opinions would be appreciated. BNutzer 00:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which workgroup should be used for record producers? 

message: There is now a temporary project page for the proposed religious leaders work group at WP:COUNCIL/P#Religious leaders. Anyone who had a hand in the creation of the existing work group pages has my profound respect, by the way. Anyway, as the group now seems to have enough support to take off, I was wondering whether this project would accept it. I was thinking specifically of maybe making it a subproject of Biography with the religion sidebar (provided one gets created), or the other way around. Opinions? John Carter 22:15, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Religious leaders workgroup has enough members 

message: Sorry for my two month hiatus - reality can be a pain! I am still happy we did such a knockout with the WPBiography Assessment Drive (hopefully we can have another one in the near future). Currently I am devoted to perusing new articles that are introduced to Wikipedia and making sure they can assessed and tagged appropriately. Do we have a committee for this currently? --Ozgod 14:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Active again

message: W. B. Yeats has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
LuciferMorgan 13:03, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: W. B. Yeats FAR

message: There has previously been an attempt to create a temporal hierarchy based on date of birth in addition to the existing hierarchy based on year of birth. This initiative was however strangled in its birth about a year ago. Would there be any support for a renewed initative from members of this WikiProject? On the Norwegian (nynorsk) Wikipedia such a hierarchy exists and seems to be both innocuous and well-functioning. __meco 13:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth by date hierarchy 

message: Whats the opinion on getting one of these? It would definitely make it easier to tag and target good and bad biography articles - probably at a dedicated location like Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/New Articles? 87.194.107.47 16:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Article Bot feed