This is anarchive of past discussions aboutWikipedia:WikiProject Biography.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 thecurrent talk page.

This article is about a white collar criminal who has the distinction of being sentenced to a longer term than Bernard Madoff, 845 years. This article has a number of issues that I have attempted to address, but expert help is urgently needed. --JohnnyB256 (talk)17:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of this article and have some issues that need addressing, which can be found atTalk:Mary Higgins Clark/GA1. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)08:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedA. E. J. Collins for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.Cirt (talk)13:59, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey. We've got an RfC open atTalk:Asmahan#RfC to try to reach consensus as to how to display her nationality. Any comments from people here would be most appreciated. Thanks! —HelloAnnyong^{(say whaaat?!)}19:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Some help would be appreciated here. The article was previously deleted several times for copyright violation. Permission was obtained to copy the text from one website; there is nothing, however, that confirms the neutrality of that content, as will be evident upon reading. Other text has been copied from various websites, mainly descriptions of books by online booksellers. Whether this content was original to commercial websites, or copied from the books themselves matters little. The concern is that they may still be copyright violations, and do not constitute reliable objective references. In all, the subject may merit an article, but much of what is being provided appears to be self-referential and non-neutral. This has been rather copiously discussed not only at the current article talk page[1], but previously at my talk page[2], that of the sole contributor to the article[3], and that of an administrator[4]. Thanks.JNW (talk)19:28, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

I have reassessed this article and found issues with the referencing which need to be addressed if the article is to retain GA status. The reassessment comments are atTalk:Andrea Dworkin/GA1. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)20:31, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Could someone with experience in biographical articles take a look at theJustin Solondz article. --JWSchmidt (talk) 01:30, 5 July 2009 (UTC)Related article:Briana Waters. --JWSchmidt (talk)01:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I've cut out some commentary and unsupported information from theJustin Solondz article and removed the 'unfairly convicted' bit fromBriana Waters. The Waters article could likely use another set of eyes and further reference double checks though. --ponyo (talk)02:08, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

At theJustin Solondz article someone added some information and wrote: "Sources are directly from 2 of these girls who are now awaiting trial", which sounded odd.User:Ponyo took outsome of what had been added butthen it was quickly added back. --JWSchmidt (talk)04:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Someone editing from209.107.217.8 also recentlyadded information aboutRachel Corrie toList of The Evergreen State College people. The added information is not sourced and seems to contradict what is said at theRachel Corrie article, although that article mentions that there is some controversy in the matter...I'm not familiar with that situation. --JWSchmidt (talk)04:37, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

This seems to be more of a situation forWP:AN/I than for here.Wildhartlivie (talk)04:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

• Asmahan (edit |talk |history |protect |delete |links |watch |logs |views)

An RFC is open at this article which is marked as within the scope of this Wikiproject but the RFC has so far seem very few responses. It would be very helpful to resolving the matter if any interested editors could stop by and offer any thoughts.

CIreland (talk)01:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Neil Armstrong has been nominated for agood article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article togood article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns arehere.--TonyTheTiger(t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)03:58, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedFrederick Hamilton-Temple-Blackwood, 1st Marquess of Dufferin and Ava for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.YellowMonkey (cricket calendar poll!)paid editing=POV02:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedAnne of Great Britain for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.john k (talk)17:19, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedGeorge F. Kennan for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.Otumba (talk)18:44, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I also submitted a couple of Biographical articles for GAR. They are all for Medal of Honor recipients and they are.Michael J. Daly,Charles Pomeroy Stone, andMerritt A. Edson. --Kumioko (talk)19:30, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Spotlight An article covered by this WikiProject,Marco Polo, is currently under theSpotlight. If you wish to help, please join the editors in#wikipedia-spotlight on the freenode IRC network where the project is coordinated. (See theIRC tutorial for help with IRC)

 Chzz  ► 21:31, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Bahia Bakari (the sole survivor ofYemenia Flight 626) is up for deletion atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bahia Bakari, a semi-procedural nomination to ensure that a merge into the flight's article would not be excessive for a BLP. Input there would be appreciated. Thanks,Cosmic Latte (talk)01:04, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Billy Sunday has been nominated for agood article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article togood article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns arehere. --Happy editing!Nehrams2020 (talk •contrib)06:11, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Please be aware that{{WikiProjectBanners}} allows the{{Blp}} message to display when the |living=yes parameter is set within{{WPBiography}}.

However{{WPBS}} aka{{WikiProjectBannerShell}}does NOT display the{{Blp}}. For examples seeTalk:George Clooney, which displays{{Blp}}, andTalk:John Candy which doesn't. Please refer to the history ofTalk:John CandyIF it has been recently updated to display{{Blp}}.

This should be used

{{WikiProjectBanners|1={{WPBiography |living=yes |class= |priority= }} |2={{WikiProject projectname |class= |importance=}}}}

instead ofthis

{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1={{WPBiography |living=yes |class= |priority= }}|2={{WikiProject projectname |class= |importance=}}}}

Can a Bot be created to replace{{WPBS}} with{{WikiProjectBanners}} ?98.71.212.16 (talk)15:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Any BLP which uses a banner shell should use blp=yes as a parameter within the shell itself and omit the living=yes from the template. ie:

{{WikiProjectBannerShell|blp=yes|1={{WPBiography |class= |priority= }} {{WikiProject projectname |class= |importance=}}}}

As such, there is no need to replace anything. By the by, John Candy has been dead for 15 years so he his biography is not one of a living person. Regards,Woody (talk)15:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the bad example. Ahh! I see, perhaps there is an article out there using the other shell, just can't find an example at the moment. Thanks for the quick reply!98.71.212.16 (talk)15:57, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

There is worse news. The original code for{{WPB}} has been replaced by the code for{{WPBS}} with|collapsed= set to yes. In my view this was not at all necessary but occurred because a few admins, one in particular, decided that{{WPBS}} was more powerful and more flexible than{{WPB}} and, therefore, the latter should be eliminated. The details are onTemplate talk:WikiProjectBannerShell andTemplate talk:WikiProjectBanners. Notice that the recoding did not require any review process and no such process was sought. As the templates are protected so that only admins can edit them we non-admin editors are stuck with what has been foisted upon us.

JimCubb (talk)20:22, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I hope this is the right place to ask this question - if not, I'd appreciate a bit of direction on where I should post it.I have been working on a biography recently, and the person in question is a controversial scientist. In trying to present aspects of his work I have been running into quite a bit of grief with people reverting edits on the grounds that they violate various combinations of WP:UNDUE, FRINGE, NPOV, PEACOCK, and COATRACK. What has dawned on me is that people are applying these tags to the persons' research, not the biography. That is, the research this person has conducted is considered FRINGE (I argue it's Alternative Theoretical Formulation), so any mention of his work in the bio is being attacked for violating FRINGE and UNDUE, even though the sources are not FRINGE or UNDUE.I'm not sure if all of that is as clear as it could be, so I'll try to put it into a question and example; When writing a WP:BIO does UNDUE/FRINGE etc. restrict only the quality of the material/views presented (i.e. only present material that accurately reflects the majority view of what this person did), or can these policies also restrict presenting the actual work of the person who is the subject of the article? So for instance, if Joe Blow (who satisfies notability) conducted research into unicorns living on Venus, and there are plenty of reliable sources covering his efforts, can a biography on Joe Blow actually present the various elements of his unicorn research in some detail provided the biographical information is accurate and satisfies verifiability etc., or does WP severely restrict mention of unicorns on Venus research because it is such a fringe topic that it does not conform to the majority view of science, regardless of notability? Any help people could provide on this would be very welcome! Cheers,Blippy (talk)09:51, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

You could present Joe Blow's unicorn work in his bio, so long as it's not discussed so extensively as to become an article on the unicorn theory. But if Joe Blow is notable enough for a bio, his unicorn theory might be notable too. It would depend on context.SlimVirgin^{talk|contribs}10:59, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

That's great SV, thanks for your time. In this particular instance Joe Blow (Ian Stevenson) is very notable, as is his theory. Cheers,Blippy (talk)11:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to get others' input regarding addition of information about awards won by living persons, especially whether there are relevant guidelines or general principles. I have a potentialconflict of interest with a well-known public figure who has a Wikipedia article, and would like to include some appropriate information about public awards won. I have a list of 25 such awards going back the past four years, and although I have not done research to findreliable citations for them, I presume for now they do exist. However, I am not quite sure where lies the line between being informational and overdoing it. I've looked at guidelines within this WikiProject, as well asWP:SPAM,WP:AUTO andWP:NOT but neither make any such mention. Please let me know if you can. Thanks,NMS Bill (talk)20:07, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

This category at one time had more that 375,000 articles. Through extensive effort by editors and at least one bot it is now down to 50,000 articles.

There are still a few editors who are working on the articles in this category but a bot is no longer useful. (The last time it was run it could only work on one out of 400 pages.) The category is growing by almost 100 articles per day. What needs to happen now is for a larger number of editors who are very knowledgable in the naming conventions of many cultures to take 30 minutes or more per day and work on the articles within a specific area of the alphabet.

I have managed to clean out the articles before "A", the ones after "Z", the ones in "Q" and the ones in "X" and I monitor those letters each day. I am currently working on "V" because I wanted a break from Chinese and Arabic names and because it had fewer than 500 articles when I started.

Please jump in almost anywhere as a test effort. If you become interested in working on the project, please register your interest in theappropriate place on the category's talk page. You have nothing to lose but your sanity and how much of that is left anyway?

I may put a guide to how I determine a valid value to the|listas= on a sub-page to mytalk page once I figure out how to make such a page. Until then feel free to ask me about any part of the process that puzzles or bothers you.

JimCubb (talk)20:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I have reviewedArthur Rose Eldred for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailedhere. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing!Nehrams2020 (talk •contrib)22:38, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

As we near the 40th anniversary ofApollo 11, the article onNeil Armstrong could use just a little work.

1. Someone has tagged a few sentences "citation needed" - it would be great to get those cleaned-up.
2. There seems to be a small discrepancy betweenApollo 11 andNeil Armstrong concerning how much fuel the lunar lander had for landing.

Thanks for your help,JMG (talk)07:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of this article and dues to the number of concerns raised, I have de-listed it. Review atTalk:Canaletto/GA1. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)13:57, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted aGA Sweeps reassessment of this article and found a large number of concerns which can be see ayTalk:Caravaggio/GA1. The article has been de-listed, but can be brought back toWP:GAN when these have been addressed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)15:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I am looking for a few editors who would be willing to help me significantly expand thelist of dermatologists. Would any of you consider working on this project? ---kilbad (talk)15:44, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

I have reassessed the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. There are some concerns which you can see atTalk:David Heymann/GA1. If these are not addressed, the article will be de-listed.Jezhotwells (talk)19:04, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Japan is looking to start up a biography task force in order to handle the very large number of biographies about Japanese and Japan-related people. If you are interested in participating, pleasego here and indicate your interest. Thanks! ···日本穣^? ·投稿 ·Talk to Nihonjoe07:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

We'd also like to operate it as a joint task force if WP:BIOG is interested. ···日本穣^? ·投稿 ·Talk to Nihonjoe23:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

hi i was reading the article about judge gwliym williams,i have done a family tree and i have found out that i am related to the judge,when the judge owned the miskin manor he had maids working for him,my grans gran was a waitress at the miskin manor at the time the judge got my gran pregnant,when the judge found out that she was pregnant he got rid of her and sent her packing back to the rhondda,is there any one i could speak to about the history or any relations many thanks allan thomas—Precedingunsigned comment added by89.243.18.114 (talk)11:11, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedStanisław Koniecpolski for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.Nishkid64_{(Make articles, not wikidrama)}14:54, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Guys, could you please check the ratings issued byMephiston999 (talk ·contribs) ? GA-class tag onVincenzo Brenna that passed on my watchlist seems suspicious. Unfortunately I don't have enough time to investigate it myself.NVO (talk)13:37, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I've checked some assessments by this user; a few of them seem a bit generous to me, but for the most part I think they're good. Articles shouldn't be rated as GA-Class without going through theWP:GAN process, though, so I'll leave a note on the user's talk page. I didn't read throughVincenzo Brenna, but it looks like a solid B-Class article to me; it certainly ain't no stub!PC78 (talk)15:26, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Han van Meegeren/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)18:35, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Hiroh Kikai/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)19:04, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Jean-Claude Mézières/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)19:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Paul Rand/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)18:51, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found a large number concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Julius and Ethel Rosenberg/GA1. Consequently I have de-listed the article. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)00:48, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Scarlett Johansson has been nominated for agood article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article togood article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns arehere.--TonyTheTiger(t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)20:48, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Doesn't this violate a Wikipedia Policy against autobiographies? He is the major contributer to his own self made article,Carmel-by-the-Sea, which he is using to market his theatre and push self serving information. He was blocked tonight for a 3R Rule violation, for continuing to revert a change of an image he uploaded of a theatre that comes staright from a brochure.--Amadscientist (talk)07:33, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

First of all, this isn'tWP:AN/I or any other admin board, so any opinions you get here will only address bottom line questions regarding the article itself. You really don't want opinions about the 3RR, ownership or edit warring after I took a look at the history forCarmel-by-the-Sea. That article wasn't created by the editor to whom you refer and none of those things belong in a discussion here. Be that as it may, concerningStephen Moorer,WP:AUTOBIO is a content guideline whichdiscourages creating an autobiography, but there is no policy expressly prohibiting an article created by the subject so long as the subject meetsWP:NOTABILITY, isreliably sourced and does not violateWP:NPOV.Wildhartlivie (talk)09:17, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

That was just horrible. You have nearly no idea what you are talking about. I didn't say that Carmel by the sea was created by that editor. I said the Stephen Moorer article was. This discussion belongs here. I asked a legitimate question.

You are defending the very thing that the Guidline and several others were created to avoid. Then basicaly accuse me of edit warring and ownership issue. I have only been back on that page for the last few days. The ownership issue is on the other editor who keeps reverting sound edits, especialy envolving his theatre and company. A clear conflict of interest. But if this is merely turned around on me for bringing this up then perhaps Wikipedia is not the right place for me.--Amadscientist (talk)20:36, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Look, you came here to ask one question, about policy. No, there is nopolicy prohibiting someone from starting an article about him or herself. There are guidelines discouraging it, and the article must meet the same standards all others do. If you will read the sentence you wrote, it says "He is the major contributer to his own self made article,Carmel-by-the-Sea, which he is using to market his theatre and push self serving information." No matter what you intended, the sentence somes say, perhaps inadvertently, that the article he created wasCarmel-by-the-Sea. This page is not the place to discuss other issues you might have with an editor and you've been given suggestions elsewhere about where to take those issues. Period. I have also told you I have no interest in entering the fracas about the rest of these issues. I would like to give you a piece of advice though. You are garnering no favor when you make statements such as "That was just horrible. You have nearly no idea what you are talking about." Suchpersonal attacks are unacceptable and behavioral guidelines such as ones concerningcivility apply to everyone.Wildhartlivie (talk)00:05, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedKylie Minogue for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.Cirt (talk)11:26, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see atTalk:Arctic Monkeys/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)23:32, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found a large number of concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Natasha Bedingfield/GA1. I have de-listed the article which can be renominated atWP:GAN when these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)20:27, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Black Lab. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)20:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Bleeding Through/GA2. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)21:28, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedIsambard Kingdom Brunel for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.—Precedingunsigned comment added byParrot of Doom (talk •contribs) 11:27, 22 July 2009

I have nominatedDouglas Adams for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.Awadewit (talk)16:22, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me or has there a sudden rush on FARs lately? They are coming just when so many editors are involved in brushing up or working on issues in the GAR sweeps. The timing seems a little bad to me.Wildhartlivie (talk)17:00, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the referencing which you can see atTalk:Blondie (band)/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)19:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found a number of concerns with the article which you can see atTalk:Sarah Brightman/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)17:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of theGA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see atTalk:Butthole Surfers/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks.Jezhotwells (talk)18:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikiproject Politics has upgraded the assessment on theJack Dormand article to GA. Should the biography project banner be updated to reflect this? Or does an independant check need to be done? --ponyo (talk)15:37, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

The article passed a GA review back in 2007, so it should be rated as GA-Class. I'm surprised it wasn't already, actually.PC78 (talk)15:54, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for checking! Cheers, --ponyo (talk)16:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Richard Francis Burton has been nominated for agood article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article togood article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns arehere. --MalleusFatuorum16:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Here's a discussion about subject development you might find interesting.

The Transhumanist21:58, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm currently doing a rewrite ofKiliaen van Rensselaer (merchant) (seework space), and have come to find out that the sources I'm using from Google books and elsewhere do not agree on the birth and death years of this man. What is the protocol for indicating this in the infobox and in the parens after the individual's name at the beginning of the article? I've included a footnote for both instances, giving examples of sources and what they indicate for birth and death. Any help would be appreciated.wadester1604:55, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedNorman Borlaug for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere.Dabomb87 (talk)03:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I have nominatedThomas Pynchon for afeatured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meetsfeatured 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 arehere. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk)19:24, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Some of you know that David Ferriero has been nominated by President Obama to be the next head of the National Archives. I went to his page and I was surprised to find a lot of sections on personal characteristics ("sense of humor" and "personal touch") as if the person was an intimate friend. I work in the organization under his direction and most of those personal characteristics are not apparent. It seems inappropriate in Wikipedia to discuss one's sense of humor unless it's a significant factor in the person's biography. In short, the article sounded more like a resume or cover letter for his next job. Most of the article was written by a single person, and when I put up two NPOV flags, this person became very offended and tried to remove them. I ask interested others to help polish the article to reflect a neutral or balanced POV. Thanks. --kosboot (talk)14:47, 31 July 2009 (UTC)