This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kent F. Richards article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
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 Start-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 Latter Day Saint movement, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement 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.Latter Day Saint movementWikipedia:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementTemplate:WikiProject Latter Day Saint movementLatter Day Saint movement articles
This article has been marked as needing a freely-licensed image to replace a copyrighted images, to comply with Wikipedia's policy for non-free content of living people. Many copyright-free image sources are listed at public domain image resources, you could create your own, or you may request permission from the copyright holder of the original images to release them under a free license. – The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
This article was nominated for deletion on 24 June 2014. The result of the discussion was no consensus.
This article was nominated for deletion on 3 March 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.
The contention in the AFD was over whether a profile, and other coverage in Deseret is sufficient to establish notability for a Mormon leader given that Deseret is church affiliated, but also a statewide paper that covers Mormon church affairs the way the cities in cities with lots of Catholics cover the diocesan affairs. So, now there is a profile [1] of Richards in a big Utah paper owned by an out-of-state for-profit corporation. If I was a conspiracy theorist, I'd say that the AFD was answered by church placement of an AFD a profile in a non-Church-related newspaper. Good way to game WP. Score one Mormons. On the other hand, that's pretty grandiose. It assumes that someone in an office in Salt Lake City monitors WP articled on Mormon leaders. I have no idea. I'm removing the tags, because this (and the increasing coverage that has followed his new-ish job) really does seem to satisfy concerns. I'm flagging User:Lankiveil, User:Good Olfactory, User:Cavarrone, User:Banaticus, User:Purplebackpack89/C only because I thought some of you might be amused by this evidence that someone in Utah apparently has the resources to answer prayers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:36, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
a) AFD was answered by church placement of an AFD? I don't understand what you're saying. b) It's entirely possible that someone at church HQ was aware of this because I called them. I tried to see if I could get a confirmation on whether such articles as http://www.cell.com/ajhg/abstract/S0002-9297%2807%2960234-1 were authored (in part) by the same Kent F. Richards who's the subject of this article. I'm fairly certain it is, but I didn't want to list it unless I could be really certain. I got as far as Richard's secretary, who said that she'd call me back after verifying, but she never did and I didn't care enough to call back a second time. I don't think there's any sort of conspiracy theory here. I think, as more light is shed on a subject, you're going to find more on that topic. Banaticus (talk) 01:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was joking. (the word "amused" was supposed to be the tip-off) The Standard Examiner is an independent, reliable source. It would be grandiose of Wikipedians to think that the LDS Church cares enough about Wikipedia to plant articles.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:15, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
