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 sourcedmust 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:
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women
Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Content
The lead section is evident, the overview is useful however should include a formatting that is similar to the most bibliographies which include a concise overview of the profession the individual, the date of birth and significance, the information provide doesn't give a date of birth of death(if necessary.
The key points/sub-points are some what unclear
The contribution need more information about her personal life howeever this is only a draft so its a respectable amount of information
The points that are presented in this text are well supported
Thesis and analytic focus
The focus of the topic is clear
The information seems appropriate to the case
Representativeness
The contribution could use more perspective on other scholars views on her and her work
The tone is appropriate however for the information given
Sourcing details
Claims aren't cited with references and doesn't really have many sources
Neutrality
The article has some non-neutral tones without supporting citations.
No, The article sometimes states opinions as facts
Yes
The Coverage is very balanced just could use more elements and content to the paper
Readability
A.
The paper is very well written
Sentences are carefully crafted to be grammatically correct
Yes
Yes
Yes
B.
Yes
Yes
Yes
C.
No
D.
No there should be pictures however \
Open Ended Questions
Question One
The topic its self seems interesting and she seems like an important scholar in academia
Question Two
More Content
Pictures — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.26.251.150 (talk) 00:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)Reply
