This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Military 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 supported by the military biography work group (assessed as Low-importance). Women's History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Biography / North America / United States / World War II Start‑class This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale. This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces: /  Military biography task force North American military history task force United States military history task force World War II task force United States: Military history Low‑importance 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. This article is supported by WikiProject Military history - U.S. military history task force.

I have just posted the article and am still fine tuning everything and doing more in-depth research on this lovely lady. If you happen to know anything about her or have any research, your help would be much appreciated! Epchdc ( talk) 22:44, 2 October 2016 (UTC) reply

“But, she proved them wrong and graduated in 1924 with a degree in Advertising”. Advertising shouldn’t be capitalized here. In the Early Career section, you mention Silverstein’s name in the beginning but don’t use it again for multiple paragraphs. It sounded redundant when I read “she” over and over again. The amount of unbiased, straightforward information is good in this section though. In your final sentence of her early career section, I would link CBS radio, New York City, and United Press Radio. Linking her to other important pages will help solidify her spot on Wikipedia. “They were married in April 1927.” I would not say “were” married but would change it to something like “became married.” I think adding in “a son” in the following sentence is unnecessary. Maybe it’s just me but I would not think of William to be a girl. I think it goes without saying. I like the chronological transition between the Personal and Family Life section and the Military Service Section. I would elaborate on the Late Career section and go into detail on what she did in these positions. Overall the page was well written. Epm98f ( talk) 16:55, 4 October 2016 (UTC)epm98f Epm98f ( talk) 16:55, 4 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello!

The article looks great overall! The one thing I really noticed were small grammatical errors, such as using he instead of she, very minor edits. Also, in the personal and family life section just organize it in chronological order, her death was mentioned before her divorce which occurred first from what I'm seeing.

Hope these minor edits help in some sort of way! Looks awesome, keep it up! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Summer.easley ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 6 October 2016 (UTC) reply

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Epchdc.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 23:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC) reply

Lots of great information in this article. The organization structure for her life's work would be better arranged by type of work, rather than chronologically. For example, instead of "Early Career" a heading that notes something like "Pre-War Journalism Career" would more clearly indicate what follows. Her coverage of the Windsor wedding and Paris fashion might also be put together under a heading suggesting celebrity, fashion and media coverage. This would help divide her work for the war and world/political news coverage from other types of journalism.

Your writing is clear and concise, you've provided good citations here, and your lead section is very strong. Good work. MeganPeiser ( talk) 14:55, 14 November 2016 (UTC) reply

I'm going to de-PROD this; I don't see how the rationale applies:

Very well written article, very well structured. However, I'm not seeing how this person is notable. Searches are difficult, since there are a ton of folks with this name, but I can find nothing which shows they pass WP:GNG. The vast majority of this article relies on a primary source, Taylor's own papers. She was accomplished, but most likely not notable.

A book published by an academic press is pretty much the definition of a good source. I can't see how someone whose work is covered in a source like that would would fail to meet the GNG. Ian (Wiki Ed) ( talk) 21:20, 8 December 2016 (UTC) reply

Hi Ian (Wiki Ed) - I don't disagree with your assessment of that book. But that's a single source. None of the other sources go to notability. I'd be more than happy to see such a well written article stay, and if more in-depth coverage from independent sources can be added, I'm fine with it remaining. As per WP:GNG: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Am I missing something? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 22:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC) reply