This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Doria Ragland article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
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 |
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 sourced must 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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There are some unreliable sources that state that she was born September 1956 or September 2, 1956 and that her middle name is Loyce. One of these sites also state that her mother was Ava Burrows, but if other (less than reliable sources) are correct, this woman was her step-mother born just a few years before Ragland.
If some solid news or other reliable sources can be found for month of birth, middle name, or other information, that would be great to add back.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 21:11, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding your recent edits, it is far better to tag sources that you question with {{ Better source}} than to delete all the content -- which is covered in a number of sources. I did remove the one bit that isn't reported in a number of places about association membership.
By the way, I wanted to add a comment, but the rollback function makes the edit without allowing for that opportunity. I forgot about that until it was done.
It makes it harder to go back and review the content and find better sources from history, but I'll work on that. You also removed a comment that didn't apply to the content you were removing.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 16:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) -- 2.27.208.53 ( talk) 18:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
She is the mother of a newly instated member of the Royal Family. How this article should be deleted, is beyond me! The article of Meghan's father, has not been suggested to be deleted, so why this article? Is this what racism has come to in 2018?! 2.27.208.53 ( talk) 18:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
A sentence like "She is the first African-American parent of a member of the British royal family" (in the lead, even) is an example of a US local bias. The level of US-specific detail is absurd, given that she is the first American parent of a member of the British royal family regardless of skin colour, and even the first such parent from the Americas regardless of both ethnicity, country and other local characteristics. However, if she were Czech, Moroccan, Israeli, Indian, Chinese or Finnish (really: most countries other than the UK itself and Germany, and to a lesser extent France and a few others), she would also have been "the first parent" from such a background. It would be impossible to not find something "first" about her. It's only to be expected that a foreign individual whose child marries into a European royal family on a different continent is the "first" individual in that situation from that specific background. This is really trivial. "First African American" this or that is a term used when discussing roles that white Americans have long occupied in their own country while African Americans have been excluded. It's not a relevant term when discussing a situation in which no white American has ever found themselves. -- Tataral ( talk) 21:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Relating to my comment above about the Kate Middleton effect and a potential Meghan Markle effect article, I started a discussion at Talk:Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex#Meghan_Markle_effect.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 18:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
thank you Victuallers ( talk) 13:49, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I saw that these article was up for deletion, regardless of the result I believe an article of the mother of the wife of the sixth to the throne is not relevant enough to have its own article (in that case the parents of the Countess of Wessex and ViceAdmiral Lawrence should have its own articles as well) I suggest to have this article merge with Family of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex MaliG28 ( talk) 14:42, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
What are the rules about articles about an individual who's only notability is via their relationship to an actually notable figure? Peter G Werner ( talk) 06:57, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
hi there. i just removed a poor quality photo as for a biography under wp:blp it seems very poor indeed. Govindaharihari ( talk) 18:26, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
hi, I don't agree that better than nothing is a correct blp standard and have opened a chat for feedback at the noticeboard Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Doria_Ragland - thanks Govindaharihari ( talk) 17:22, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
The photograph is ridiculous. It hardly illustrates the subject, as required by Wikipedia:Image use policy. There is no requirement to have a lead/infobox image, and it would be much more appropriate and useful to include the original video clip in the Personal life section instead. After all, the point is to illustrate the subject, and the clip does it much better than that horrid screenshot. Surtsicna ( talk) 17:54, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
I have a better photo. How do I submit it? Queensgrl ( talk) 22:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, this image is awful and very poorly reflects the image of the subject. in violation of MOS:IMAGELEAD and wp:blp please see the awful photo here, Doria_Ragland#/media/File:Doria_Ragland.png it was claimed in the previous discussion that the photo is better than nothing, is that the wikipedia policy way? Govindaharihari ( talk) 19:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Remove the image - agree with Govindaharihari ( talk) that "better than nothing" is not a valid reason to add an image to a bio article. It's poor. ArchieOof ( talk) 16:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
I reverted the edit here by 86.145.1.197 that added an unknown parameter, "origin" to the Infobox. It doesn't show up, and is a bit confusing, as she was born in Ohio. I posted a message here, because when I did the rollback I wasn't given the edit summary box.–– CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:30, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Why does Doria Ragland have a wikipedia page. She is not a person of note and has no particular accomplishments. Her past is somewhat shady, rumors of a prison term, known drug use and child abandonment. She is Meghan Markle's mother but is that enough to give her a wikipedia page? Thomas Markle is at least a 3 time Emmy Award winning lighting director. Boing55 ( talk) 00:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
In looking up Doria's company where she is CEO I came across the below - which indicates that the company is a shell company, that it does not actually provide any services. In the Bustle article referenced on her wikipedia page to confirm this appointment it is mentioned that Meghan Markle's lawyer got her this gig. Is this another one of the corporations Meghan set up in Delaware? It seems more research is needed before including this on wikipedia. Seems a lot of information about her is unclear or vague, including her date of birth, middle name, mother's name, as mentioned above.
https://skippyv20.tumblr.com/post/644804113118478336/dorias-company-loving-kindness-senior-care Boing55 ( talk) 00:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Doria was not a qualified Make up Artist, she was on the set helping put make up on actors, she was not a professionally qualified make up artist, she did try to become one but failed. 14.203.5.26 ( talk) 11:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Megan Markle never claimed she was black until she met Harry, on her driver's licence she claimed she was caucasian not mixed race. 14.203.5.26 ( talk) 11:50, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
This article contains large amounts of albeit sourced but absolutely non-noteworthy material, plus some things which apparently are shifty and omissions of (shady) things that could be noteworthy. It's an embarrassment to Wikipedia.
Proposal: delete everything non-noteworthy and keep only that she is the mother of the Duchess of Sussex and attended the wedding. SergeWoodzing ( talk) 12:37, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
3O: To me, this looks like general biographical info of a person deemed notable by the sources, as well as consensus on Wikipedia, and not trivia. Pyrrho the Skipper ( talk)
Why has such a a blurry photo been chosen, she has loads of clear photos on Google, I’m not understanding? ClaireJohnsonIndia ( talk) 22:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
She has been listed as the 'mother of Meghan gold-digger Markle' and there are a number of other more subtle, but equally judgemental, comments made (e.g. in reference to her marriage) 84.64.72.53 ( talk) 05:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
I am not sure why, but here have been several attempts to add "Rachel" to Meghan's name - or change Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. One time, the reason was that they were changing the name to her legal name. The changes have removed links to Meghan's articles (e.g., Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Family of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.)
A couple of things:
What is the reason why links would be removed to add the name Rachel to her name in the article? If you think the article title for Meghan's article should be changed, it should be brought up there, rather than attempting to use a different name in her mother's article.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
her name needs to be correct. The title if Duchess does not apply here in the United States. Her name is Rachel Meghan Markle. She's not Madonna or Fergie. Erodrig5 ( talk) 20:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Erodrig5, There is an active discussion about her name at Talk:Meghan, Duchess of Sussex#I wish to revert to the updated complete title of Meghan Markle's title on the first line of the article.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Doria Ragland article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report 3 times. The weeks in which this happened: |
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 |
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 sourced must 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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There are some unreliable sources that state that she was born September 1956 or September 2, 1956 and that her middle name is Loyce. One of these sites also state that her mother was Ava Burrows, but if other (less than reliable sources) are correct, this woman was her step-mother born just a few years before Ragland.
If some solid news or other reliable sources can be found for month of birth, middle name, or other information, that would be great to add back.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 21:11, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Regarding your recent edits, it is far better to tag sources that you question with {{ Better source}} than to delete all the content -- which is covered in a number of sources. I did remove the one bit that isn't reported in a number of places about association membership.
By the way, I wanted to add a comment, but the rollback function makes the edit without allowing for that opportunity. I forgot about that until it was done.
It makes it harder to go back and review the content and find better sources from history, but I'll work on that. You also removed a comment that didn't apply to the content you were removing.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 16:14, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... (your reason here) -- 2.27.208.53 ( talk) 18:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
She is the mother of a newly instated member of the Royal Family. How this article should be deleted, is beyond me! The article of Meghan's father, has not been suggested to be deleted, so why this article? Is this what racism has come to in 2018?! 2.27.208.53 ( talk) 18:35, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
A sentence like "She is the first African-American parent of a member of the British royal family" (in the lead, even) is an example of a US local bias. The level of US-specific detail is absurd, given that she is the first American parent of a member of the British royal family regardless of skin colour, and even the first such parent from the Americas regardless of both ethnicity, country and other local characteristics. However, if she were Czech, Moroccan, Israeli, Indian, Chinese or Finnish (really: most countries other than the UK itself and Germany, and to a lesser extent France and a few others), she would also have been "the first parent" from such a background. It would be impossible to not find something "first" about her. It's only to be expected that a foreign individual whose child marries into a European royal family on a different continent is the "first" individual in that situation from that specific background. This is really trivial. "First African American" this or that is a term used when discussing roles that white Americans have long occupied in their own country while African Americans have been excluded. It's not a relevant term when discussing a situation in which no white American has ever found themselves. -- Tataral ( talk) 21:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Relating to my comment above about the Kate Middleton effect and a potential Meghan Markle effect article, I started a discussion at Talk:Meghan,_Duchess_of_Sussex#Meghan_Markle_effect.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 18:41, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
thank you Victuallers ( talk) 13:49, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
I saw that these article was up for deletion, regardless of the result I believe an article of the mother of the wife of the sixth to the throne is not relevant enough to have its own article (in that case the parents of the Countess of Wessex and ViceAdmiral Lawrence should have its own articles as well) I suggest to have this article merge with Family of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex MaliG28 ( talk) 14:42, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
What are the rules about articles about an individual who's only notability is via their relationship to an actually notable figure? Peter G Werner ( talk) 06:57, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
hi there. i just removed a poor quality photo as for a biography under wp:blp it seems very poor indeed. Govindaharihari ( talk) 18:26, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
hi, I don't agree that better than nothing is a correct blp standard and have opened a chat for feedback at the noticeboard Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Doria_Ragland - thanks Govindaharihari ( talk) 17:22, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
The photograph is ridiculous. It hardly illustrates the subject, as required by Wikipedia:Image use policy. There is no requirement to have a lead/infobox image, and it would be much more appropriate and useful to include the original video clip in the Personal life section instead. After all, the point is to illustrate the subject, and the clip does it much better than that horrid screenshot. Surtsicna ( talk) 17:54, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
I have a better photo. How do I submit it? Queensgrl ( talk) 22:49, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, this image is awful and very poorly reflects the image of the subject. in violation of MOS:IMAGELEAD and wp:blp please see the awful photo here, Doria_Ragland#/media/File:Doria_Ragland.png it was claimed in the previous discussion that the photo is better than nothing, is that the wikipedia policy way? Govindaharihari ( talk) 19:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Remove the image - agree with Govindaharihari ( talk) that "better than nothing" is not a valid reason to add an image to a bio article. It's poor. ArchieOof ( talk) 16:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
I reverted the edit here by 86.145.1.197 that added an unknown parameter, "origin" to the Infobox. It doesn't show up, and is a bit confusing, as she was born in Ohio. I posted a message here, because when I did the rollback I wasn't given the edit summary box.–– CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:30, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Why does Doria Ragland have a wikipedia page. She is not a person of note and has no particular accomplishments. Her past is somewhat shady, rumors of a prison term, known drug use and child abandonment. She is Meghan Markle's mother but is that enough to give her a wikipedia page? Thomas Markle is at least a 3 time Emmy Award winning lighting director. Boing55 ( talk) 00:37, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
In looking up Doria's company where she is CEO I came across the below - which indicates that the company is a shell company, that it does not actually provide any services. In the Bustle article referenced on her wikipedia page to confirm this appointment it is mentioned that Meghan Markle's lawyer got her this gig. Is this another one of the corporations Meghan set up in Delaware? It seems more research is needed before including this on wikipedia. Seems a lot of information about her is unclear or vague, including her date of birth, middle name, mother's name, as mentioned above.
https://skippyv20.tumblr.com/post/644804113118478336/dorias-company-loving-kindness-senior-care Boing55 ( talk) 00:55, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Doria was not a qualified Make up Artist, she was on the set helping put make up on actors, she was not a professionally qualified make up artist, she did try to become one but failed. 14.203.5.26 ( talk) 11:38, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Megan Markle never claimed she was black until she met Harry, on her driver's licence she claimed she was caucasian not mixed race. 14.203.5.26 ( talk) 11:50, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
This article contains large amounts of albeit sourced but absolutely non-noteworthy material, plus some things which apparently are shifty and omissions of (shady) things that could be noteworthy. It's an embarrassment to Wikipedia.
Proposal: delete everything non-noteworthy and keep only that she is the mother of the Duchess of Sussex and attended the wedding. SergeWoodzing ( talk) 12:37, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
3O: To me, this looks like general biographical info of a person deemed notable by the sources, as well as consensus on Wikipedia, and not trivia. Pyrrho the Skipper ( talk)
Why has such a a blurry photo been chosen, she has loads of clear photos on Google, I’m not understanding? ClaireJohnsonIndia ( talk) 22:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
She has been listed as the 'mother of Meghan gold-digger Markle' and there are a number of other more subtle, but equally judgemental, comments made (e.g. in reference to her marriage) 84.64.72.53 ( talk) 05:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
I am not sure why, but here have been several attempts to add "Rachel" to Meghan's name - or change Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. One time, the reason was that they were changing the name to her legal name. The changes have removed links to Meghan's articles (e.g., Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Family of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.)
A couple of things:
What is the reason why links would be removed to add the name Rachel to her name in the article? If you think the article title for Meghan's article should be changed, it should be brought up there, rather than attempting to use a different name in her mother's article.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:45, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
her name needs to be correct. The title if Duchess does not apply here in the United States. Her name is Rachel Meghan Markle. She's not Madonna or Fergie. Erodrig5 ( talk) 20:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Erodrig5, There is an active discussion about her name at Talk:Meghan, Duchess of Sussex#I wish to revert to the updated complete title of Meghan Markle's title on the first line of the article.– CaroleHenson ( talk) 19:08, 18 May 2023 (UTC)