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

Biography 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 Medicine: Society Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Society and Medicine task force. Women writers Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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 writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Psychology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology 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.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. LGBT studies: Person This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.LGBT studiesWikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studiesTemplate:WikiProject LGBT studiesLGBT articles This article is supported by the LGBT Person task force.

It appears that this entry was written by Ms Gartell or a fan. Using words like "groundbreaking" is an indicator. These normally would not appear in a neutral article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.170.200.183 ( talk) 05:27, 6 November 2012 (UTC) reply

This article is very poorly written. Very promotional. The history shows several SPAs who heavily edited this page and almost nothing else (except for the page of subject's partner - Dee Mosbacher).
Despite being advised on their talk pages about COI, they have continued to edit (rather aggressively and enthusiastically but only on these accounts), and specifically, remove the COI tags. I have reinstated them for now. I consider any removal of tags without valid rationale, as agreed on the talk page by consensus, to be further breaches of 3RR, COI & PROMO and grounds for requesting page protection to curb their interference.
History

• Davidajane ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Akfuller ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Natedogg1835 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• EllenAsberry ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) (this editor has only been active on the Mosbacher article. All others have been SPA/COI over both accounts)

Rayman60 ( talk) 18:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Rayman60, I see nothing in this article that justifies the tags or the accusations on the editors above, and bearing in mind WP:BRD, and WP:3R, nothing that authorises you to insist on a discussion about their removal. Please comment. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 05:00, 29 July 2017 (UTC) reply
• I would support removing the tag, because it implies wrongdoing on the part of the subject, and there have been very few disputed edits. SarahSV ^(talk) 05:24, 29 July 2017 (UTC) reply