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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FYI, someone reverted a cat fix I performed earlier. Just to clear this up, I have removed two redundant categories from the article:
- Category:American lawyers was redundant with Category:New York lawyers. Note that New York lawyers refers to all lawyers whose article mentions they have actively practiced in the state of New York, while American lawyers refers to all lawyers who have actively practiced in the United States. Therefore all New York lawyers are likewise also American lawyers, so including the article in both categories is redundant. Lawyers who practice on behalf of the federal government fall under Category:American federal lawyers. Currently the only articles that should appear directly under Category:American lawyers are those which do not specify in which specific states the lawyer has actively practiced.
- Category:AIDS activists is a subset of Category:AIDS activism. Obviously all notable AIDS activists likewise are notable AIDS activism articles, so including the article in both categories is unnecessary.
Hope that clears it up. If there are any further questions, though, please feel free to discuss them here before reinserting the removed categories. Thanks. Dugwiki 19:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you but then he should also be under Category:American federal lawyers because he worked for the Clinton White House. The article isn't complete, but it gets that across. I am confused by the difference between Category:American federal lawyers and Category:American lawyers. Also, is there a Category:International lawyers since he does much work in Africa? The Category:AIDS activism can obviously go, then. Regarding the patience issue, advice taken. But if I may offer advice: If a person reverts back, that's an invitation to not re-revert, but to discuss since someone feels you are wrong. Otherwise, wrestling takes place. That's what I do. In this case, you were right and I was wrong, but re-reverting is bad form, especially when you could have checked the history to see it was the originator of the article, instead of writing "FYI, someone reverted a cat fix I performed earlier" and then re-reverting. Perhaps we both need a little more patience? Thanks for enlightening, anyhow, and I'll await your answers about the American/Am Fed categories and which is more appropriate. -- DavidShankBone 21:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Guess that's about it. Sorry if it came across as blunt before on the revert. Later! Dugwiki 22:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
It certainly is common in biographies to mention famous kin, and that's why I just moved it to the "Personal" section instead of removing it. I don't think it belongs in the lead, because the lead should summarize what's notable about Barnes. Probably dozens of currently people are descended from Boone, but most of them aren't notable enough for Wikipedia articles, so his ancestry isn't really part of his notability. I would suggest a reading of WP:LEAD to work out what the best lead of this article might cover. — coelacan talk — 04:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
FYI, someone reverted a cat fix I performed earlier. Just to clear this up, I have removed two redundant categories from the article:
- Category:American lawyers was redundant with Category:New York lawyers. Note that New York lawyers refers to all lawyers whose article mentions they have actively practiced in the state of New York, while American lawyers refers to all lawyers who have actively practiced in the United States. Therefore all New York lawyers are likewise also American lawyers, so including the article in both categories is redundant. Lawyers who practice on behalf of the federal government fall under Category:American federal lawyers. Currently the only articles that should appear directly under Category:American lawyers are those which do not specify in which specific states the lawyer has actively practiced.
- Category:AIDS activists is a subset of Category:AIDS activism. Obviously all notable AIDS activists likewise are notable AIDS activism articles, so including the article in both categories is unnecessary.
Hope that clears it up. If there are any further questions, though, please feel free to discuss them here before reinserting the removed categories. Thanks. Dugwiki 19:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree with you but then he should also be under Category:American federal lawyers because he worked for the Clinton White House. The article isn't complete, but it gets that across. I am confused by the difference between Category:American federal lawyers and Category:American lawyers. Also, is there a Category:International lawyers since he does much work in Africa? The Category:AIDS activism can obviously go, then. Regarding the patience issue, advice taken. But if I may offer advice: If a person reverts back, that's an invitation to not re-revert, but to discuss since someone feels you are wrong. Otherwise, wrestling takes place. That's what I do. In this case, you were right and I was wrong, but re-reverting is bad form, especially when you could have checked the history to see it was the originator of the article, instead of writing "FYI, someone reverted a cat fix I performed earlier" and then re-reverting. Perhaps we both need a little more patience? Thanks for enlightening, anyhow, and I'll await your answers about the American/Am Fed categories and which is more appropriate. -- DavidShankBone 21:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Guess that's about it. Sorry if it came across as blunt before on the revert. Later! Dugwiki 22:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
It certainly is common in biographies to mention famous kin, and that's why I just moved it to the "Personal" section instead of removing it. I don't think it belongs in the lead, because the lead should summarize what's notable about Barnes. Probably dozens of currently people are descended from Boone, but most of them aren't notable enough for Wikipedia articles, so his ancestry isn't really part of his notability. I would suggest a reading of WP:LEAD to work out what the best lead of this article might cover. — coelacan talk — 04:07, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 23:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)