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: | ||||||||||
|
I suspect there is a WP:COI issue going on here.
I have removed lots of material from this article, for a number of reasons (check the history for more line-specific reasoning). The article contained a number of quotes and musings from Ms. Fisher that are not relevant. An encyclopedia article should state facts, in clear, unadorned language. It should not have excruciating detail about her, her clothing, etc. when she is a marginal figure at best. Consider vastly more famous people, like Bill Gates and Angelina Jolie, whose pages make no mention of their clothing style.
In addition, references need to be added that make her notability clear. As it stands, I am unsure whether she is notable enough for a Wikipedia page.
I will be watching this page. I respectfully ask that you do not revert my edits unless you are able to explain how the content I removed does not violate Wikipedia's policies. Conical Johnson ( talk) 03:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
ConicalJohnson comments and article deletions were meant for Wikipedian contributor and editor Boolalah. The relevant back-and-forth thread of conversation dialogue is posted and may be accessed/followed on the Boolalah Talk Page. Boolalah has addressed the (initial) multiple issues of seemingly rude, snide, direct personal attack comments attached to ConicalJohnson’s editorial deletions, and the improper posting of the afore direct "open letter" with an improper salutation to the (living person) subject matter of the article, "TJ Fisher." ConicalJohnson recently posted a less terse communication; both editors seek to work together in a collaborative not warring fashion. The pillars of Wikipedia are based on a collaborative effort of volunteer editors of many diverse backgrounds and opinions, coming together; editors striving to share and shape referenced, cited and verifiable information in the creation of notable articles of interest and accuracy, and a NPOV from all. Boolalah ( talk) 21:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC))
Article topics are required to be notable, or "worthy of notice." It is important to note that a notability determination does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or the popularity of a topic. (Notability is not temporary.) The subject matter at hand qualifies under notability guidelines for Books [award] and People category [coverage for Photo Howdy Doody (improperly deleted from article)] and press-coverage for protracted litigation [$60M suit and $33.3M dollar judgment/reversal]. Too much notable detail was purged from the living person biography article, regarding material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability. Boolalah ( talk) 18:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Please stop adding this content:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=TJ_Fisher&diff=317204719&oldid=317177052
It is completely irrelevant to this person's notability that she lives on Bourbon Street and drives a Cadillac. Your claimed explanation for this is that Fats Domino is notable for this?
TJ Fisher is an extremely marginal figure, whereas Fats Domino is extremely well-known the world-over. And even then, Fat's car is not mentioned in the lead. See WP:NPF. It says that for people who are relatively unkown, we should "include only material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability". Just being verifiable does not mean content deserves to be in an article. As I pointed out in my previous edit, the lead is not for opinions, and since her claimed notability is as an author, quotes about how "outrageous" she is have no place in this article. If you add this content again, instead of edit warring with you, I'll ask some third parties to come in and give their opinion on this. I don't want to just revert war over this, it's pointless. Conical Johnson ( talk) 02:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Helpful instructional Wiki contributor/editor sharing collaboration effort can be sincere and real. Sincerity is not passive-aggressive. Repeated tags for notability, ongoing suggestions and tags for citing, dereferences and verification — then repeated sarcasm and complaints (deletions of things previously noted for reference, then verified), is not the way of sincere Wikipedians. This page remains non-nuetralPOV, snide and mean-spirited. Some changes/deletions made were good regarding excessive detail. Others were inappropriate. Article creators can add too much detail. Editors on a mission to remove relative detail they do not "get" in the scope of an article as a unit damage Wiki articles. Purposeful or not. Recent changes includes major factual errors. Mistakes need fixed. A new non-biased, non-angry, NPOV contributors/editor (non Blue Man) with an understanding biographical pages about living people needs to rewrite the page. Boolalah ( talk) 20:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Want to collaborate not drama push. Seek Wikipediana with civil additions/contributions to and the accepting of inevitable criticism on an article or content building and research. People bios, contributions with citations and references takes work, research and interaction. First, waiting for Conical Johnson to strike/delete the (unreported) direct address to TJ Fisher on the Discussion Page as it is violates Wikipedia policy as a prohibited personal attack that is bad for the article and contributor(s). On shaping Articles Wikipedia Notables aren't always household names. Repeatedly demeaning a article subject and calling verified, cited, references a "bio" appears non-neutral. Criticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability. Sourced material relevant to the subject's notability is supposed to be included. On this editor collaboration things concurrent (referenced) with the subject matter's notability keep being deleted. Suggest guidance be sought from the notice board for bios of living persons(?). Boolalah ( talk) 18:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Back on line. Will work on article. Bios include some color. Will try to collaborate. Remain open to help but not page guarding. Seek to collaborate on unoriginal research without Arbitration. Boolalah ( talk) 19:43, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Yikes! Again? I don't have much time these days to edit WP, but I support HelloAnnyong's edits. I don't think your assertion that "bios contain some color" is supported on Wikipedia. When a person is extremely famous and has been deemed to be heavily influential in the world, like John Lennon, then a little more coverage of that person's thoughts and personality is given, because these thoughts are seen as having powerful influence over society. But the level of detail has to always be proportional to the level of notability and influence, and in the case of a relatively obscure figure, these details don't belong in the article. I think there is a specific set of actions to be taken here, but I'll leave those thoughts on the appropriate user talk page. Perhaps a 4th opinion should be brought in so we can have a clear consensus? Conical Johnson ( talk) 09:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Details for HelloAnnyong to restore to article:
1. Author lives in and writes books about the French Quarter (distinctive from New Orleans). 2. Reference to author's award-winning book [page notability (versus separate merit)], i.e. quoted references from San Fran Chronicle.
Will also seek unbiased BLP Board, Editor Assistance.
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: | ||||||||||
|
I suspect there is a WP:COI issue going on here.
I have removed lots of material from this article, for a number of reasons (check the history for more line-specific reasoning). The article contained a number of quotes and musings from Ms. Fisher that are not relevant. An encyclopedia article should state facts, in clear, unadorned language. It should not have excruciating detail about her, her clothing, etc. when she is a marginal figure at best. Consider vastly more famous people, like Bill Gates and Angelina Jolie, whose pages make no mention of their clothing style.
In addition, references need to be added that make her notability clear. As it stands, I am unsure whether she is notable enough for a Wikipedia page.
I will be watching this page. I respectfully ask that you do not revert my edits unless you are able to explain how the content I removed does not violate Wikipedia's policies. Conical Johnson ( talk) 03:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
ConicalJohnson comments and article deletions were meant for Wikipedian contributor and editor Boolalah. The relevant back-and-forth thread of conversation dialogue is posted and may be accessed/followed on the Boolalah Talk Page. Boolalah has addressed the (initial) multiple issues of seemingly rude, snide, direct personal attack comments attached to ConicalJohnson’s editorial deletions, and the improper posting of the afore direct "open letter" with an improper salutation to the (living person) subject matter of the article, "TJ Fisher." ConicalJohnson recently posted a less terse communication; both editors seek to work together in a collaborative not warring fashion. The pillars of Wikipedia are based on a collaborative effort of volunteer editors of many diverse backgrounds and opinions, coming together; editors striving to share and shape referenced, cited and verifiable information in the creation of notable articles of interest and accuracy, and a NPOV from all. Boolalah ( talk) 21:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC))
Article topics are required to be notable, or "worthy of notice." It is important to note that a notability determination does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or the popularity of a topic. (Notability is not temporary.) The subject matter at hand qualifies under notability guidelines for Books [award] and People category [coverage for Photo Howdy Doody (improperly deleted from article)] and press-coverage for protracted litigation [$60M suit and $33.3M dollar judgment/reversal]. Too much notable detail was purged from the living person biography article, regarding material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability. Boolalah ( talk) 18:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Please stop adding this content:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=TJ_Fisher&diff=317204719&oldid=317177052
It is completely irrelevant to this person's notability that she lives on Bourbon Street and drives a Cadillac. Your claimed explanation for this is that Fats Domino is notable for this?
TJ Fisher is an extremely marginal figure, whereas Fats Domino is extremely well-known the world-over. And even then, Fat's car is not mentioned in the lead. See WP:NPF. It says that for people who are relatively unkown, we should "include only material relevant to their notability, while omitting information that is irrelevant to the subject's notability". Just being verifiable does not mean content deserves to be in an article. As I pointed out in my previous edit, the lead is not for opinions, and since her claimed notability is as an author, quotes about how "outrageous" she is have no place in this article. If you add this content again, instead of edit warring with you, I'll ask some third parties to come in and give their opinion on this. I don't want to just revert war over this, it's pointless. Conical Johnson ( talk) 02:37, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Helpful instructional Wiki contributor/editor sharing collaboration effort can be sincere and real. Sincerity is not passive-aggressive. Repeated tags for notability, ongoing suggestions and tags for citing, dereferences and verification — then repeated sarcasm and complaints (deletions of things previously noted for reference, then verified), is not the way of sincere Wikipedians. This page remains non-nuetralPOV, snide and mean-spirited. Some changes/deletions made were good regarding excessive detail. Others were inappropriate. Article creators can add too much detail. Editors on a mission to remove relative detail they do not "get" in the scope of an article as a unit damage Wiki articles. Purposeful or not. Recent changes includes major factual errors. Mistakes need fixed. A new non-biased, non-angry, NPOV contributors/editor (non Blue Man) with an understanding biographical pages about living people needs to rewrite the page. Boolalah ( talk) 20:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Want to collaborate not drama push. Seek Wikipediana with civil additions/contributions to and the accepting of inevitable criticism on an article or content building and research. People bios, contributions with citations and references takes work, research and interaction. First, waiting for Conical Johnson to strike/delete the (unreported) direct address to TJ Fisher on the Discussion Page as it is violates Wikipedia policy as a prohibited personal attack that is bad for the article and contributor(s). On shaping Articles Wikipedia Notables aren't always household names. Repeatedly demeaning a article subject and calling verified, cited, references a "bio" appears non-neutral. Criticism and praise of the subject should be represented if it is relevant to the subject's notability. Sourced material relevant to the subject's notability is supposed to be included. On this editor collaboration things concurrent (referenced) with the subject matter's notability keep being deleted. Suggest guidance be sought from the notice board for bios of living persons(?). Boolalah ( talk) 18:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Back on line. Will work on article. Bios include some color. Will try to collaborate. Remain open to help but not page guarding. Seek to collaborate on unoriginal research without Arbitration. Boolalah ( talk) 19:43, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
Yikes! Again? I don't have much time these days to edit WP, but I support HelloAnnyong's edits. I don't think your assertion that "bios contain some color" is supported on Wikipedia. When a person is extremely famous and has been deemed to be heavily influential in the world, like John Lennon, then a little more coverage of that person's thoughts and personality is given, because these thoughts are seen as having powerful influence over society. But the level of detail has to always be proportional to the level of notability and influence, and in the case of a relatively obscure figure, these details don't belong in the article. I think there is a specific set of actions to be taken here, but I'll leave those thoughts on the appropriate user talk page. Perhaps a 4th opinion should be brought in so we can have a clear consensus? Conical Johnson ( talk) 09:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Details for HelloAnnyong to restore to article:
1. Author lives in and writes books about the French Quarter (distinctive from New Orleans). 2. Reference to author's award-winning book [page notability (versus separate merit)], i.e. quoted references from San Fran Chronicle.
Will also seek unbiased BLP Board, Editor Assistance.