Talk:Nigella Lawson: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 86.181.10.231 - "→Hillgrove: " |
→Insight: new section |
||
Line 49: | Line 49: | ||
:There was an article, but it was deleted - see [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Hillgrove]]. [[User:PaleCloudedWhite|PaleCloudedWhite]] ([[User talk:PaleCloudedWhite|talk]]) 11:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC) |
:There was an article, but it was deleted - see [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Hillgrove]]. [[User:PaleCloudedWhite|PaleCloudedWhite]] ([[User talk:PaleCloudedWhite|talk]]) 11:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC) |
||
::You are quite right, PaleCloudedWhite. I stupidly over-looked the deletion debate. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.181.10.231|86.181.10.231]] ([[User talk:86.181.10.231|talk]]) 13:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
::You are quite right, PaleCloudedWhite. I stupidly over-looked the deletion debate. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.181.10.231|86.181.10.231]] ([[User talk:86.181.10.231|talk]]) 13:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
== Insight == |
|||
Ever listened to |
|||
Van Halen - Van Halen - Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love |
|||
There is a section about cooking |
|||
regards |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/5.69.249.96|5.69.249.96]] ([[User talk:5.69.249.96|talk]]) 15:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:50, 4 January 2014
Nigella Lawson has been listed as one of the Agriculture, food and drink good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | ||||||||||
|
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Jewish category
Our position on this matter is that if a reliable source verifies that she identifies as being Jewish (not "influenced" or the like) and if there is a consensus that her putative Judaism is relevant to her notability, then we can use this category. If not, not. --John (talk) 19:50, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- It's actually even stronger than that in the case of potentially controvertial attributes such as religion and sexual orientation. The RS that reports the subject's religion or sexual orientation must in fact be reporting/quoting an explicit statement directly from the subject. Roger (talk) 20:00, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Archive
Why isn't there a proper Archive link "box" on this page? A short note in plain text is very easy to miss. Roger (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Encyclopaedic chefs!
Such a long article for someone whose only contribution to mankind is........cooking...........food! Oh and how could I forget, doing a lot of spoon licking. She is indeed a fine looking lady and her background is quite interesting, her family history etc., but why do we need to know all this when all we need to know is that she cooks. Her name could simply appear in a list of Renowned British Chefs: eg. "Nigella Lawson: Cooks and has published recipe books". Why so much information, how could this information in anyway have any encyclopaedic value. Wikipedia should redefine itself from an encyclopaedia to an '"Embraceopedia" a word that could capture the essence of the project, one which has articles on "anything" as long as the "something" is known and can be referenced! Juan019 (talk) 06:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Honorable
We are told that Nigella does not use the title "honorable". This is true, but it is impolite to extend courtesy titles to yourself, anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.152.26.92 (talk) 10:06, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Mentioning the death of her first husband in the infobox
In other articles, I have seen in the Spouse(s) section of the infobox the notation "his death" right after the year in which a marriage ended. I am reluctant to add it here myself because I fear there are guidelines for its use that I am unaware of. --anon. 71.183.133.71 (talk) 23:15, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Verdict
Shouldnt the article mention the verdict today?--BabbaQ (talk) 17:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Hillgrove
I see that there is no article in Wikipedia on Richard Hillgrove. In view of his importance, there should be one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.10.231 (talk) 10:56, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
- There was an article, but it was deleted - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Hillgrove. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 11:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
- You are quite right, PaleCloudedWhite. I stupidly over-looked the deletion debate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.10.231 (talk) 13:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Insight
Ever listened to
Van Halen - Van Halen - Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love
There is a section about cooking
regards
- Wikipedia good articles
- Agriculture, food and drink good articles
- Biography articles of living people
- All unassessed articles
- GA-Class biography articles
- GA-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Low-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- GA-Class Food and drink articles
- Low-importance Food and drink articles
- WikiProject Food and drink articles
- GA-Class Journalism articles
- Low-importance Journalism articles
- WikiProject Journalism articles
- GA-Class London-related articles
- Low-importance London-related articles
- GA-Class television articles
- Low-importance television articles
- WikiProject Television articles
- GA-Class University of Oxford articles
- Low-importance University of Oxford articles
- GA-Class University of Oxford (colleges) articles
- WikiProject University of Oxford articles