Talk:Ricky Lauren

Article name

Does anyone know why the article name is Ricky Anne Loew-Beer and not Ricky Lauren, particularly as the books that she's written are as Ricky Lauren? It seems like this page should be moved to Ricky Lauren.--CaroleHenson (talk) 13:31, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Definitely agree with that. Though it's best to wait till after the AfD has concluded before moving the page. Sionk (talk) 14:15, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Excellent point!--CaroleHenson (talk) 16:58, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I also agree should be under Lauren and should be moved when the AfD concludes. SusunW (talk) 17:29, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Her name is most consistently given as "Ricky Lauren" in the press, and the name on her books is Ricky Lauren, so I am requesting an administrative move to "Ricky Lauren" as mentioned above and in the Article for deletion discussion. Specifically, on a google search for "Ricky Ann Low Beer" OR "Ricky Ann Low-Beer" gets 25 hits and Ricky Lauren gets 102,000 hits—CaroleHenson (talk) 13:26, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Requested move with this edit, which I think then gets moved to Wikipedia:Requested moves#January 19, 2017.—CaroleHenson (talk) 13:47, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Entertaining

SusunW,

I am going to start incorporating information from the sources you provided on the AfD, but I haven't be sure what to call the section and where to put it. My thought at the moment is a separate section called Entertainer. But it could also go under Career as a subsection, with the current content under a subsection entitled Author.

I am also not sure that Entertainer, though, quite captures the nature of the efforts.

What are your thoughts?--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Were I structuring it, I would do it like I do all bios. Early life, career, death and legacy is my usual format. I think it falls within career, as it was building *his* career. Obviously part of the myth, fantasy, that he was self-created, is that she stayed in the background. There are actually tons of mentions in the Gleaner but mostly just snippets that they hosted parties and fundraisers. Clearly an effort to raise their profile. Maybe just something to start saying that she took on the role of supportive wife and mother while he struggled to build his business, hosting parties with socialites and celebrities to boost his profile? SusunW (talk) 17:48, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

I vary what I do with Early life, Education, and Personal life depending upon the situation. In this case, I like the idea of having Early life first - since we can tie it more directly to RL. I reorganized it to the following:

1 Early life

2 Career

2.1 Host parties and fundraisers

2.2 Author

3 Personal life

I'm just going to start adding content - under construction - and see where the information leads me in terms of connecting it to his business and building his profile. But if you have thoughts or want to jump in with additions, changes to the sections or their headings, that would be wonderful!--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:21, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Looks good for a start. I'll continue working on my Jamaican pilot and come back to check from time to time. If you need more stuff from Newspapers.com or Newspaperarchives, just let me know and I'll see what I can find. SusunW (talk) 18:33, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Sounds great! Regarding finding other articles, yes, that would be helpful, when you have a chance. Or, if you don't mind sharing your search terms, that would work, too. There is so much out there and I am impressed that you were able to zero in on these articles.--CaroleHenson (talk) 18:38, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

CaroleHenson, it is looking so much better. I literally just put in Ricky Lauren, (book name); Ricky Lauren, philanthropy and up they all came, I also tried to do a search with -Ralph, but then I didn't get her at all. I guess you could say I am a professional researcher of a sort, so I just bypass the blog-type entries and pull up anything that looks to be "newsish". Still working on my pilot, but, when I finish, will see if I can find anything more in historic newspapers. Found book review references in EBSCO, but not the actual reviews, just citations for them. SusunW (talk) 20:31, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Concerns - article tagged

Hi Doc James,

Is there someone in particular that you have in mind that may have edited the article that you are concerned about? I see someone named Fashionista Princess edited the article, but their edits have largely been revised.

This article, previously named with her maiden name, was nominated for deletion and discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ricky Anne Loew-Beer. I voted at first that I thought it should be deleted, but after much discussion, changed my mind and edited the article.

I think I am one of the major contributors to the article. When the article was built up to help bolster notability, it may have gone a little too far -- and may benefit from some editing -- I can see how you might say that. Is there something of particular that is of concern?–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:50, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Yes that is correct this "Fashionista Princess" is the editor of concern / that was paid. If issues are dealt with feel free to remove the tag. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Doc James, I had not seen anything that documented that and that person's edits are minimal in the current version - I changed it to a POV tag before I saw your posting.

You haven't really addressed the issues. What do you think needs to be done?

It seems a COI/Close connection notification is needed for the talk page and a message to the user's talk page. Did he/she (assuming Princess is a she, though), declared that she was a paid editor?–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:56, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

I see that this person has been blocked indefinitely, which means it even makes more sense right now to have the POV tag rather than the other tag. And, I don't see anything about paid editing on that user's page.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:58, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure very little of what Fashionista may have put in it are left. When we worked on this CaroleHenson it was pretty much a rewrite and I am pretty sure (like 110%) neither you nor I were paid to write anything. I'm a bit puzzled as to what the issue is. Doesn't appear to have either a COI problem of POV problem to me. SusunW (talk) 00:03, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I am so glad that you jumped into the discussion, I was just going to ping you, SusunW. I can see where there was a bit of a POV issue -- I think mainly that came out of the intention to prove notability. I did some editing and think it is better now. Do you mind taking a look and seeing what you think of how it looks now? –CaroleHenson (talk) 00:11, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

I think it's fine and even more neutral now. But didn't really have an issue with the previous version. SusunW (talk) 02:34, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:25, 3 August 2017 (UTC)

Jewish?

Jewish?