Talk:Carla Martin: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:07, 8 March 2007

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Bold text==Request for Comment: Resume-like format== Schmetterling has added content that strongly resembles a resume and has not commented on his/her edits. Does anyone have an opinion about whether the content is appropriate? 02:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While all the conduct is true, it does require cleanup. I've tagged it for cleanup - unless you want to wikify it yourself, to fit guidelines. Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є•} 07:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this is definitely disturbing. Almost nothing in the resume-style article is sourced, and it leaves out the information which is best-sourced: the controversy over the Moussaoui trial. If single-purpose accounts persist in reverting this page without discussion, protection may be necessary. PubliusFL 19:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Quite the contrary-and that is precisely the point-the "content" in the original tab is largely inaccurate, hence the need to more accurately portray the work and history of this particular person's biography. As far as sourcing, the reference section of this tab shows that virtually all the information in the edit IS sourced, either through the articles themselves, or through links within the edit.Schmetterling

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 }}
-==Request for Comment: Resume-like format==
+'''Bold text'''==Request for Comment: Resume-like format==
 [[User:Schmetterling|Schmetterling]] has added content that strongly resembles a resume and has not commented on his/her edits. Does anyone have an opinion about whether the content is appropriate? 02:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 :While all the conduct is true, it does require [[WP:CLEANUP|cleanup]]. I've tagged it for cleanup - unless you want to [[WP:STYLE|wikify]] it yourself, to fit guidelines. <font style="background-color:#cedff2;font-size:100%;font-weight:bold;border:1px solid#a3b0bf;text-align:center;color:#000;">Scalene</font><small><sup>•[[User:Scalene|UserPage]]•[[User Talk:Scalene|Talk]]•[[Special:Contributions/Scalene|Contributions]]•[[User:Scalene/Userboxes|Biography]]•<font style="color:#00F;">[[User:Scalene/Esperanza|Є]]</font>•</sup></small> 07:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 '''Comment''' - this is definitely disturbing.  Almost nothing in the resume-style article is sourced, and it leaves out the information which is ''best''-sourced: the controversy over the Moussaoui trial.  If single-purpose accounts persist in reverting this page without discussion, protection may be necessary. [[User:PubliusFL|PubliusFL]] 19:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
-Quite the contrary-and that is precisely the point-the "content" in the orginal tab is  largely inaccurate, hence the need to more accurately portray the work and history of this particular biography.  As far as sourcing, the reference section of this tab shows that virtually all the information in the edit IS sourced, either through the articles themselves, or through links within the edit.
+Comment:  Quite the contrary-and that is precisely the point-the "content" in the original tab is  largely inaccurate, hence the need to more accurately portray the work and history of this particular person's biography.  As far as sourcing, the reference section of this tab shows that virtually all the information in the edit IS sourced, either through the articles themselves, or through links within the edit.[[Schmetterling]]