Jump to content

Talk:Nigella Lawson: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
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

Good articleNigella 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 19, 2008Good article nomineeListed

User:MrKIA11/Archive Box


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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Verdict

Shouldnt the article mention the verdict today?--BabbaQ (talk) 17:08, 20 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

There was an article, but it was deleted - see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Hillgrove. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 11:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]

Insight

Ever listened to

Van Halen - Van Halen - Ain't Talkin' 'Bout Love

There is a section about cooking

regards

5.69.249.96 (talk) 15:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]