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 sourcedmust 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 is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
Vincent Lipsio left a message on my talk page, which I copy here for discussion: Peter Chastain (talk) 20:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please look into the "Like resume" tag at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diane_Roberts , which article I attempted to make conform slightly more to the "Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies)" and, in the process, moved the "Like resume" tag to the bottom of the article right above the "stub" notice. What is in the present article is all the objective information I can gather about the person; I initially wrote the article to resolve a couple of red links to her and, although I met her briefly twice (in 2004 and 2005), I have no reason to promote her or in any other way write in a non-neutral tone but may appear to have done so because all the available information is all positive. I thank you, Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think I was reacting to two things in the article: (1) Terms like "award winning", in the first paragraph, sound promotional. Details of specific awards that she has won can be mentioned in the body of the article, in a more neutral manner. (2) The long list of publications in the intro reminds me of a résumé. I am more interested in what she has written (with references) than in a list of where she has written. As for the information on where she studied, I would add that back (in separate section). A professor's educational background is always relevant. I hope other biographical information can be added as it becomes available. The article is a nice beginning, IMO. The "like a résumé" tag needs to be moved back to the top until it is no longer needed. Its purpose is not to disparage the article, but to call upon other editors to continue improving it. Peter Chastain (talk) 20:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Your points are all well taken. Indeed, it was only intended to be a beginning, little more than a stub, and so I take as a complement your writing, “The article is a nice beginning, IMO.”
When I chance to again be in the article, I’ll move back, as you suggest, the "like a résumé" tag to the top if you or someone else will not have already done so.
‘Twill be some while before I’ll have the time to flesh out the article and we can only hope that someone comes along sooner and does so.
.jpg){kind=small}