This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see at Talk:Abraham Goldfaden/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:19, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

I have nominated Penda of Mercia 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.Cirt (talk) 18:35, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I have nominated Franklin B. Gowen 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.Cirt (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

You appear to have given this article "stub class", however, having expanded the article considerably, and trawling the internet for reliable facts about this player, I would like to suggest that the article is re-assessed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by T.M.M. Dowd (talk • contribs) 21:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I've upped it to Start class. No big deal. --Stepheng3 (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I was looking at the article on Natalie Horler from Cascada, and saw she was born in 1981 in Bonn, Germany. My question, for this article and all other articles, is whether it is correct to say Bonn, Germany (as the city is today), or as Bonn, West Germany (as it was when she was born). Can you please hel me on this.

I suggest using the period name and wikilinking to the modern one, thus: Bonn, West Germany. --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm currently writing a biography article in my sandbox. The main problem I'm having is with sources, most of the article is from an autobiography by the subject himself. I'd really like to get this article up by Weds evening at the latest so would welcome comments from project members here. Mjroots (talk) 07:58, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Difficult, I can't find realiable third party sources, really, but he did author quite a few books. Primary sources are permissable when descriptive though and his work isn't controversial at all. I'm not sure how to assist you really, but I think you can post what you wrote. Before you do though, Royal Institution of British Architects in the infobox needs to have its link corrected. Hekerui (talk) 09:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Link corrected. Hopefully one of the Broadsheets will get round to publishing an obit before long. If they do, I'll be able to cull a lot of material from there. Mjroots (talk) 17:22, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

The article has now been created. Mjroots (talk) 07:43, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm in danger of slipping into an edit war with Maduro52 about some negative material deleted from the biography of a living politician. Can someone advise me on whether the material is worth keeping? I'm particularly concerned about whether it is adequately sourced. Thank you, --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Always suspect when something has lots of sources, it normally indicates somebody is trying to make a point!. It doesnt appear to be particularly notable for inclusion. Not sure if it is an American thing (as I am not American) but somebody saying bullshit (even a politician) would probably go unnoticed in the rest of the world. Although it should have really been discussed on the talk page before being removed.MilborneOne (talk) 19:44, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll buy that. (I'll also be careful not to provide lots of sources in the future :) --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I have nominated Augusta, Lady Gregory 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.Cirt (talk) 03:36, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Dear Wikipedia. Could editors of Editing Wikipedia/WikiProject Biography please do a reassessment of Josip Broz Tito article. The article is embarrassing. The Eastern European Dictator is portrayed as some sort of pop star (what is this all about & it's very strange) and should not be in any nominations other than the article that lacks NPOV. Also considering he was responsible for war crimes,mass massacres, torture & mass imprisonment makes Wikipedia look like ad for Eastern European Dictatorships. One to mention is the Foibe Massacres (there are BBC documentaries). Wikipedia has an article on this so it’s just contradicting itself. You have one feel-good article about a Dictator then you have an article about the Massacres he approved and organized with the Yugoslav Partisan Army. Then there were Death squads in Southern Dalmatia (the Croatians are putting up monuments for the poor victims & their families now). Also it’s important to mention that the Croatian Government is paying compensation to his former victims. Surely a more critical historical article should be written or this present article should be removed altogether. What is next? A Stalin feel-good article? What about the respect towards the poor victims who suffered those awful events? Can the editors please look into this?Sir Floyd (talk) 04:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Please note guys, this is a sock trying to stir-up trouble. :) He's probably User:Luigi 28, but could be User:Brunodam as well. This message was copy-pasted just about everywhere in an effort to create a fake conflict about a non-existing issue. Considering the barely disguised POV-pushing, there's really little doubt its just another in a long, looong line of socks belonging to one of the so-called "irredentist users". A group of a dozen or so (mostly Italian) POV-pushers that got banned from enWiki for edit-warring, sockpuppeteering, block-evasion, harassment, etc.. They surface now and again to make spiteful edits and insult people. --DIREKTOR ^(TALK) 23:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I have done a GA Reassessment of Ilaiyaraaja as part of the GA Sweeps project. I have found the article to not meet the current GA Criteria. My assessment can be found here. I am notifying all interested projects and editors that I have placed the article on hold pending work to return it to GA standards. If you have any questions or concerns please contact me on my talk page. H1nkles (talk) 16:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Robin Hood has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 22:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

The above article has this project's banner on its talk page. I have conducted a reassessment as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found a large number of concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Jean Charles de Menezes/GA1. I have de-listed the article. This decision may be challenged at WP:GAR or the article may be improved and re-nominated at WP:GAN. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

it would be very helpful if some interested editors could have a look at the Little Richard article and talk page - there are some ongoing issues (related to BLP, NPOV and RS, among others) that could really use input from more experienced editors. please see the edit history and these talk-page sections: Testimonials Section, comment from Smoovedogg and improving the "Influences" section. thanks Sssoul (talk) 10:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I did some source clean up on the article, tagged some references due to issues related to WP:RS and WP:ELNO and posted a comment. Oh, and notified the other editor regarding personal attacks. You're very patient. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

thank you kindly for your comments and for your work on the article, Wildhartlivie. i'm hopeful that with more experienced editors commenting/contributing, that editor might start heeding some of the relevant policies, and the article might have a chance of getting a much-needed overhaul. thanks very much Sssoul (talk) 19:55, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

José Rizal has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 16:41, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

A Request for Comment has started regarding the article Outrageous Betrayal, comments would be appreciated at Talk:Outrageous Betrayal. Cirt (talk) 05:35, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Ace Young/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. You are being notified as the talk page has a banner for this project. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 07:01, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Almost all biographical infoboxes display the subject's name. One of, if not the only, exceptions is ((Infobox Ice Hockey Player)). I have raised this matter at Template talk:Infobox Ice Hockey Player#Name, but discussion has stalled. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 20:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Frances Oldham Kelsey/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. You are being notified as the talk page has a banner for this project. Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 07:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Suharto has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:06, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Frank Fetter has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. Ruslik_Zero 16:10, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The above article (about Wasfi Beik al-Atassi (1888 -1933) (Arabic: وصفي الأتاسي‎) who was a Syrian nationalist, statesman and one of the original writers of the Syrian constitution) has been nominated for deletion by myself.

I could find no non-wiki sources of information online, and no mentions of him in any article apart from the Atassi article, which has one sentence about him, and a sentence in the Hikmat al-Hiraki article.

If anyone here with knowledge of Syrian history has some off-line references which they could add, that would be very useful! The closing date for the PROD is 2009-08-22 21:39>

Thank you -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 15:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Lope de Barrientos has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 20:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

The article Louis H. Carpenter has passed GA status and an A-Class review suggests some copy-editting work. My American has been influenced by British English and two other languages. Any help is appreciated to get this article up to A/FA class status. Thank you! Jrcrin001 (talk) 05:59, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

There are a lot of authors who have won major awards who are still at stub - ore even red link - status. Would there be interest in starting a workgroup in this area? Sabiona (talk) 15:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Largest_wikiproject.3F Ikip (talk) 14:53, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe a stupid question, but there do seem to be at least a few individual articles on individual ascended masters, or in some cases articles about multiple ascended masters. Would these articles fall within the scope of this project or not, and, if yes, would they be counted as BLPs if the party in question is to still be "active" whether their old material body died or not? John Carter (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

You always ask such tough questions. If the articles are about individual persons, then yes. If there is a corporeal body involved, and that body is living, then it is a BLP. Wildhartlivie (talk) 22:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

If the person is historical, if there are historical sources that the person in question actually existed, and if these sources are reflected in the article, then it's a biography. If it's some guy that only appears in later religious writings, for example the Book of Mormon, and that are not held to be historical people by historians, then decidedly NO. Biographies are about real people. -Duribald (talk) 23:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

A Google web search for وصفي الأتاسي‎ returns 8250 hits. A Google news search returns 3 hits. A Google books search returns 4 hits.

Unfortuantely, I can't read Arabic (although if I get a chance, I will try using Google's translate service to check out the news and book hits) - so if an Arabic-reading editor could look at these, I'm sure that there will be some reliable sources amongest them!

Regards, -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 11:29, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Is there something specific you are looking for or are you just trying to find some references. --Kumioko (talk) 13:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Basically some references from somewhere other than the family's own website! There are no English language references online (I'm going to be looking at my local libraries for information in books that I can cite) - and I can't read the Arabic references. I PROD'd this, but this was contested. I'm not looking to get it deleted (he sounds as if he could be notable under Wikipedia's criteria) - but unless references other than the family site can be found, he'd fail, surely? -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 14:09, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Incidently, I know nothing about this politician; I have no personal interest in whether the article is kept or deleted as such - but if it is kept, it needs to be referenced at reliable sources, as per Wikipedia criteria. -- PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 14:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I've proposed 4 changes to the core biographies list. Please stop by and voice your opinion. Thanks! Kaldari (talk) 16:08, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I've already left a few comments there, but given that the list has been fixed for the last three years and that discussion has been virtually non-existant for the last 18 months, I'm not sure it's wise to just reopen it like this. A more general discussion about the list as a whole and how we want to proceed with it would be more productive, I think. PC78 (talk) 17:22, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

((Infobox Ice Hockey Player)) is - so far as I can tell, having edited most - the only biographical infobox not displaying the subject's name. I believe that it (indeed all biographical infoboxes) should do so: not least (but certainly not only) so that it can emit an hCard microformat. Others disagree. Discussion is at Template talk:Infobox Ice Hockey Player#Name. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Just a note for the future, but if you are going to invite people to a discussion you need to do so in a neutral manner otherwise you are violating WP:CANVASS. This message is clearly not neutral. It also has misinformation in that displaying of the name is not required for the hCard microformat as the data can be hidden, while microformats often display all the data, its is not a requirement to do so. -DJSasso (talk) 04:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Which bit of what "I believe…" do you say is untrue, and when did you start reading my mind? And since when was the name (class="fn") no longer a mandatory parameter for an hCard microformat about a person? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI, the article Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher is under a rename discussion to pick the best article name for Admiral Jacky Fisher. It includes a lot of debate on the naming convention for British peers. Cyclopaedic (talk) 07:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Saqib Ali is currently a good article nominee. An editor has placed this article on hold to allow improvements to be made in order to satisfy the good article criteria. Recommendations have been left on the review page, and editors have seven days to address these issues. Improvements made in this period will influence the reviewer's decision whether or not to list the article as a good article. Warrior4321 00:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

((Infobox Ice Hockey Player)) is - so far as I can tell, having edited most - the only biographical infobox not displaying the subject's name. I believe that it (indeed all biographical infoboxes) should do so: not least (but certainly not only) so that it can emit an hCard microformat. Others disagree. Discussion is at Template talk:Infobox Ice Hockey Player#Name. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Just a note for the future, but if you are going to invite people to a discussion you need to do so in a neutral manner otherwise you are violating WP:CANVASS. This message is clearly not neutral. It also has misinformation in that displaying of the name is not required for the hCard microformat as the data can be hidden, while microformats often display all the data, its is not a requirement to do so. -DJSasso (talk) 04:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Which bit of what "I believe…" do you say is untrue, and when did you start reading my mind? And since when was the name (class="fn") no longer a mandatory parameter for an hCard microformat about a person? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI, the article Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher is under a rename discussion to pick the best article name for Admiral Jacky Fisher. It includes a lot of debate on the naming convention for British peers. Cyclopaedic (talk) 07:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

((Infobox Ice Hockey Player)) is - so far as I can tell, having edited most - the only biographical infobox not displaying the subject's name. I believe that it (indeed all biographical infoboxes) should do so: not least (but certainly not only) so that it can emit an hCard microformat. Others disagree. Discussion is at Template talk:Infobox Ice Hockey Player#Name. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:05, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Just a note for the future, but if you are going to invite people to a discussion you need to do so in a neutral manner otherwise you are violating WP:CANVASS. This message is clearly not neutral. It also has misinformation in that displaying of the name is not required for the hCard microformat as the data can be hidden, while microformats often display all the data, its is not a requirement to do so. -DJSasso (talk) 04:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Which bit of what "I believe…" do you say is untrue, and when did you start reading my mind? And since when was the name (class="fn") no longer a mandatory parameter for an hCard microformat about a person? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

FYI, the article Jackie Fisher, 1st Baron Fisher is under a rename discussion to pick the best article name for Admiral Jacky Fisher. It includes a lot of debate on the naming convention for British peers. Cyclopaedic (talk) 07:54, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Saqib Ali is currently a good article nominee. An editor has placed this article on hold to allow improvements to be made in order to satisfy the good article criteria. Recommendations have been left on the review page, and editors have seven days to address these issues. Improvements made in this period will influence the reviewer's decision whether or not to list the article as a good article. Warrior4321 00:09, 31 August 2009 (UTC)