Jump to content

Talk:Stephenie Meyer: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 9 WikiProject templates. The article is listed in the level 5 page: US and Canada.
 
(20 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{GA|19:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)|topic=Language and literature|page=1|oldid=937070549}}
{{GA|19:20, 22 January 2020 (UTC)|topic=Language and literature|page=1|oldid=937070549}}
{{Talk header|noarchive=yes|search=no}}
{{Talk header|noarchive=yes|search=no}}
{{DYK talk|10 February|2020|entry= ... that the idea for the ''[[Twilight (novel series)|Twilight]]'' novel series came to '''[[Stephenie Meyer]]''' in a dream?|nompage=Template:Did you know nominations/Stephenie Meyer}}
{{WPBS|blp=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Biography |living=yes |class=GA|listas=Meyer, Stephenie |auto=yes
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=yes|class=GA|vital=yes|listas=Meyer, Stephenie|1=
{{WikiProject Harold B. Lee Library|21st century=yes}}
|a&e-priority=low |a&e-work-group=yes }}
{{WikiProject Romance|class=GA|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-work-group=yes |a&e-priority=Low}}
{{WikiProject Children's literature|class=GA|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Romance|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Brigham Young University|class=GA|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Children's literature||importance=Mid}}
{{NovelsWikiProject|class=GA|importance=Low
{{WikiProject Brigham Young University|importance=Mid}}
|twilight-task-force=yes |twilight-importance=High
{{WikiProject Novels|importance=Low |twilight-task-force=yes |twilight-importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Latter Day Saint movement|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Women writers|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=low|AZ=yes|AZ-importance=Low}}
}}
}}
{{Connected contributor (paid)
{{LDSproject|class=GA|importance=Low}}
|User1=Rachel Helps (BYU)|U1-employer=BYU|U1-EH=yes|U1-otherlinks=COI declarations [[User:Rachel Helps (BYU)#Conflict of Interest statements|on userpage]]
{{WikiProject Women writers|class=GA|importance=high}}
|User2=Skyes(BYU)|U2-employer=BYU|U2-EH=yes|U2-otherlinks=COI declarations [[User:Skyes(BYU)|on userpage]]
}}
}}


{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
| archive = Talk:Stephenie Meyer/Archive %(counter)d
| archive = Talk:Stephenie Meyer/Archive %(counter)d
Line 18: Line 24:
| counter = 2
| counter = 2
| maxarchivesize = 100K
| maxarchivesize = 100K
| minthreadsleft = 1
| minthreadsleft = 5
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| minthreadstoarchive = 1
| archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}}
| archiveheader = {{Talkarchivenav}}
Line 28: Line 34:
| indexhere = yes
| indexhere = yes
}}
}}
{{Archives
{{Archive box
| auto = long
| index = /Archive index
| index = /Archive index
| bot = lowercase sigmabot III
| links = 5
| search = yes
| search-width = 40
| search-break = yes
| collapsible = yes
| collapsed = no
| bot = MiszaBot I
| units = days
| age = 120
| age = 120
| units = days
}}
}}
== DYK nomination ==
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Writers|class=B}}
{{Did you know nominations/Stephenie Meyer}}
{{DYK talk|10 February|2020|entry= ... that the idea for the ''[[Twilight (novel series)|Twilight]]'' novel series came to '''[[Stephenie Meyer]]''' in a dream?|nompage=Template:Did you know nominations/Stephenie Meyer}}{{Did you know nominations/Stephenie Meyer}}

== Links in lede ==

I reverted right away because it looked like [[WP:SYNTH]] but I ultimately forgot to take into account that this is a [[WP:GA]] and the links were added to the lede, which does not require any citations because they're all treated amply well in the body. Thanks for bearing with my foul-up! [[User:Elizium23|Elizium23]] ([[User talk:Elizium23|talk]]) 19:04, 22 May 2020 (UTC)


== LGBTQIA+ Rights Dispute ==
== emphasis on romantic relationships criticized ==


Hello @[[User:FreeThinker37|FreeThinker37]] , Could you please tell me where in the cited article for her LGBTQIA+ views Meyer " sent a message privately to Stewart containing a friendly message, along with a [[cease and desist]] notice". I couldn't find any evidence in the linked source which I why I removed the section that you added back. I also feel like the later half of the section that reads " The sudden homophobic retaliation of the statement was not surprising to many long time Stephenie Meyer detractors" is quite editorialized. I don't see how a 2009 article is relevant to a far more recent alleged homophobic incident (that still hasn't been proven) [[User:Woahitsraj|Woahitsraj]] ([[User talk:Woahitsraj|talk]]) 09:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
{{ping|James343e}}, you have twice removed the part of the sentence in the lead that "feminists have questioned the emphasis Meyer puts on romantic relationships." Per [[WP:LEAD]], this information does not have to be in-line cited in the lead. The information is supported by citations in the "Feminism" sub-section under "Views": "Meyer has been criticized by feminists who consider Meyer an antifeminist writer. They say that the series romanticizes a physically abusive relationship, pointing to red flags that include Bella's entire life revolving around Edward; never being in control of her own life; being absolutely dependent on Edward's ability to protect her life, her virginity, and her humanity; and the physical injuries Bella suffers from finally consummating her relationship with Edward." That sentence is amply supported by in-line citations on the page. I would like to return the information to the lead. Do you object? [[User:Rachel Helps (BYU)|Rachel Helps (BYU)]] ([[User talk:Rachel Helps (BYU)|talk]]) 15:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
:I totally agree in the body of the text it is explicitly said feminists critize Meyer's work. However, it is not said that Meyer is criticized by feminists for being romantic in general, but rather because Meyer "romanticizes a physically abusive relationship". It is completely different and [[original research]] to say that Meyer "is criticized for putting emphasis on romantic relationships" in general, when the body of the text explicitly says she is criticized for romanticizing physically abusive relationships in particular, rather than any kind of romantic relationship.[[User:James343e|James343e]] ([[User talk:James343e|talk]]) 22:50, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 08:02, 20 October 2024


DYK nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk07:09, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reviewed: Bill Hare
  • Comment: Became GA on 1/22/2020

Improved to Good Article status by Skyes(BYU) (talk). Self-nominated at 20:49, 22 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]

  • Article listed as GA 1/22/2020, not previously ITN or DYK, long enough, well cited, all 4 hooks stated in article and supported by inline citations and labeled as refs, no dispute tags, meets BLP criteria, neutrally written, not at AFD. QPQ completed. Hooks are all formatted well, are short enough, neutral, and focus on unusual facts. ALT0 wins my vote for the surprise effect! Good to go. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:28, 25 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

LGBTQIA+ Rights Dispute

[edit]

Hello @FreeThinker37 , Could you please tell me where in the cited article for her LGBTQIA+ views Meyer " sent a message privately to Stewart containing a friendly message, along with a cease and desist notice". I couldn't find any evidence in the linked source which I why I removed the section that you added back. I also feel like the later half of the section that reads " The sudden homophobic retaliation of the statement was not surprising to many long time Stephenie Meyer detractors" is quite editorialized. I don't see how a 2009 article is relevant to a far more recent alleged homophobic incident (that still hasn't been proven) Woahitsraj (talk) 09:42, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]