Talk:The Dougy Center

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Dougy Center article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1: 90 days

The Dougy Center has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society 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.
Review: October 5, 2015. (Reviewed version).

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Hampton11235, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 3 September 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Oregon Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

There is a request, submitted by --Another Believer _(Talk), for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia.

The rationale behind the request is: "Good article on English Wikipedia".

Map needed

It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Oregon may be able to help!

COI[edit]

Extended content

In accordance with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide, I have chosen to disclose that I have a personal connection to this subject. I will spare details (those who know me well would know my reasons), but my main purpose in writing this article is to benefit Wikipedia and its mission. I believe this article is written from a neutral perspective and has been constructed from independent, reliable sources. The second link above provides the following summary, which I believe I have followed appropriately:

Be transparent about your conflict of interest ( Done)
Subjects require significant coverage in independent reliable sources. ( Done)
Your role is to inform and reference, not promote or sell. ( Done)
Be extremely cautious about the risks of editing articles about yourself or your clients ( Done|N/A)
If writing a draft, write without bias, as if you don't work for the company or personally know the subject. ( Done)
State facts and statistics, don't be vague or general. ( Done)
Take time to get sources and policy right. ( Done)
Get neutral, uninvolved, disinterested editors to review your draft. ( Doing...)
Work with the community and we'll work with you. ( Doing...)
Communicate, communicate, communicate. ( Doing...)

My goal is to promote this article to Good status. I understand this will require review and assistance from other members of the community, which is great. I invite all to examine this article carefully to make sure the content is fair and accurate. Feel free to contact me if you have any concerns. --Another Believer _(Talk) 23:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've requested a copy edit by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:41, 12 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Nominating for Good article status. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:50, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update:

Article promoted to Good status. Thank you, Cirt, for your help. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from WP:GA Reviewer: After reviewing this article and subsequently promoting it to WP:GA, I can say in retrospect the above declared WP:COI was certainly very nice to know, but did not turn out to be a problem whatsoever. I am, however, glad it was brought to this stage of review, for third-party members of the Wikipedia community to evaluate. The only minor indicator type issue I saw was one pull-quote-box, which I removed from the article. Good job overall, and thanks for being so open and responsive to community feedback, — Cirt (talk) 01:39, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Source[edit]

http://www.wweek.com/news/2016/10/19/meet-two-portland-women-who-make-their-livings-talking-about-the-ultimate-taboo-death/ ---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date[edit]

@Another Believer: - I stumbled across this GA, and it looks like it hasn't been updated in about 10 years, with nothing reflecting the last several years of events, and the statistics being to older sources. Any chance you'd be able to revisit and update this one so that it's still compliant with the GA criteria? Hog Farm _Talk 00:26, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm currently traveling and can't make this an immediately top priority, but I'm happy to start by sharing some more recent sources to consider:

---Another Believer _(Talk) 01:10, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I don't know how much I'll be able to do myself - I've got a major professional examination next week, and am already committed to working on another good article review and a featured article review. Hog Farm _Talk 02:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]