This article was nominated for deletion on 4 January 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 8/5/2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
WikiProject Biography Assessment
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 23:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
(discussion moved/refactored from User talk:AnonEMouse and User talk:Bastique, as it should be useful to future editors of the article)
We received a pretty heated complaint at OTRS about this article, from an individual extremely close to the subject. I read the article, and it was pretty overwhelmingly brutal to Suzen Johnson. Personally, I believe that all the pertinant information was already there. The remainder is pretty non-notable, and fairly tabloidish. I did revert it, not because of the quality of your contribution, because you clearly put a lot of work into it.
Please understand that I have no personal interest in this article at all. We are just volunteers answering correspondence for the Wikipedia Foundation.
Try to go easier on Mrs. Johnson if you are going continue to contribute to the article. ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 22:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I only reverted to pre your most recent edit. Put back in the less controversial information and we'll work on the other stuff a bit more slowly. *sigh* ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 23:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Have no fear about that delete nom...not going to happen. I've heard of her before this started, and that's worthwhile enough for me to argue against it. ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 02:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I still think the article goes overboard to push the point that Suzen Johnson is an undesirable human being. Please be patient and I will try to get my specific remarks later. I want to stress that without a clear consensus (and even 4-3 in favor of deletion is not a clear consensus) the article will be kept. Had there been any risk of deletion or the slightest chance that this article would be removed, I would have "rushed". As it is, the vote is 2-3 against deletion. It's not likely to disappear anytime soon. Bastique 18:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Allow me to first say that I think you've done a great job on the article.
You are free to take or leave any suggestions I may offer. However, I believe the article still feels tabloidy with certain content.
I made some style changes, that don't change the content but change the tone a little bit. (attempt at humor: Later today, I'm going to drive 12 miles to Boca Raton and see if the Globe has any positions available. I bet I could write for them!) ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 12:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Marriam-Webster defines mistress as "a woman other than his wife with whom a married man has a continuing sexual relationship." Marriam-Webster defines affair as "a romantic or passionate attachment typically of limited duration."
She had an affair with Gifford. She was not his mistress. She flatters herself in the title of her website.
Nick Beeson ( talk) 03:50, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
What happened with that?
Also, in the suit it was mentioned that the relationship was ‘platonic’. What was said in the 2001 website, and was it different to that? If changed was any explanation offered? More detail needed. 24.4.136.172 ( talk) 19:44, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 4 January 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 8/5/2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
WikiProject Biography Assessment
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 23:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
(discussion moved/refactored from User talk:AnonEMouse and User talk:Bastique, as it should be useful to future editors of the article)
We received a pretty heated complaint at OTRS about this article, from an individual extremely close to the subject. I read the article, and it was pretty overwhelmingly brutal to Suzen Johnson. Personally, I believe that all the pertinant information was already there. The remainder is pretty non-notable, and fairly tabloidish. I did revert it, not because of the quality of your contribution, because you clearly put a lot of work into it.
Please understand that I have no personal interest in this article at all. We are just volunteers answering correspondence for the Wikipedia Foundation.
Try to go easier on Mrs. Johnson if you are going continue to contribute to the article. ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 22:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
I only reverted to pre your most recent edit. Put back in the less controversial information and we'll work on the other stuff a bit more slowly. *sigh* ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 23:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
Have no fear about that delete nom...not going to happen. I've heard of her before this started, and that's worthwhile enough for me to argue against it. ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 02:13, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I still think the article goes overboard to push the point that Suzen Johnson is an undesirable human being. Please be patient and I will try to get my specific remarks later. I want to stress that without a clear consensus (and even 4-3 in favor of deletion is not a clear consensus) the article will be kept. Had there been any risk of deletion or the slightest chance that this article would be removed, I would have "rushed". As it is, the vote is 2-3 against deletion. It's not likely to disappear anytime soon. Bastique 18:11, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Allow me to first say that I think you've done a great job on the article.
You are free to take or leave any suggestions I may offer. However, I believe the article still feels tabloidy with certain content.
I made some style changes, that don't change the content but change the tone a little bit. (attempt at humor: Later today, I'm going to drive 12 miles to Boca Raton and see if the Globe has any positions available. I bet I could write for them!) ℬastique▼ parℓer♥ voir♑ 12:45, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 16:11, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
Marriam-Webster defines mistress as "a woman other than his wife with whom a married man has a continuing sexual relationship." Marriam-Webster defines affair as "a romantic or passionate attachment typically of limited duration."
She had an affair with Gifford. She was not his mistress. She flatters herself in the title of her website.
Nick Beeson ( talk) 03:50, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
What happened with that?
Also, in the suit it was mentioned that the relationship was ‘platonic’. What was said in the 2001 website, and was it different to that? If changed was any explanation offered? More detail needed. 24.4.136.172 ( talk) 19:44, 25 December 2021 (UTC)