Talk:Natasha Hausdorff
Latest comment: 20 hours ago by Cannolis in topic Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 December 2024
| 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 has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered. |
Article structure
editNot sure about how this is all laid out. Going to do some more research on her, add it and tighten things up accordingly. MaskedSinger (talk) 09:07, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, that'd be good. Andre🚐 09:21, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
- The idea was fine, and the image you uploaded is great, but this now has many one-sentence paragraphs, which is not what we strive for. Also, some deletions are questionable. --184.153.21.19 (talk) 04:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Large deletion
editI'm not clear what the thinking is behind this large deletion. BLP was mentioned, but there is nothing in our BLP rules that I can think of that calls for it. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 04:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- What I forgot to mention was WP:NOTNEWS WP:TOOMUCH - excessive details into incidents. She speaks out on international law - no need to go into granular minutiae of this. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I didn't see anything in wp:blp that was relevant. As far as wp:notnews is concerned - that likewise strikes me as inapplicable. These are not a passing news story. But themes that are recurrent and central to her views.
- Similarly, wp:toomuch is simply an essay. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. It has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. And if applied as it was here, an editor could simply delete all manner of content that they did not want others to be aware of under that rubric .. their subjective view that content, RS-covered, is "excessive". These are her central, oft-repeated, RS-covered views on issues central to her notability. The bald assertion that it is "excessive detail" (or irrelevant or trivial) simply does not resonate here. I would urge reconsideration and restoration, as the only thing that strikes me as excessive here, frankly and with all due respect, is the large deletion. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 05:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- ok will do. thanks. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. And again - excellent work uploading the photo. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 05:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- you're welcome. thanks for your help here. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- There were also--less critical of course--a number of non-substantive changes that veered away from MOS, btw. Taking the italics off publications (such as The Jerusalem Post). Changing initial cap formatting, in a way that was not consistent with MOS. Also, some slight puffery, not supported by the RSs, that was added (words such as well-known, frequently, etc.), which is unnecessary and gives the flavor of not being encyclopedic - a flavor we want to avoid, as the content is not puffery, but rather encyclopedic. BTW, if you look at the Alan Dershowitz article, much longer as he is twice her age, you can see that it is appropriate to lay our the positions of an academic scholar. And when you cut out material such as where her parents met, and leave in that they immigrated to Britain, it begs the question as to where they immigrated from. Also, formerly inlined, you have taken the inlines off some names (Columbia Law School, Munk Debate, etc.). I'm not sure why that was thought to be an improvement, but they should be restored I would suggest. And I'm not sure why her Vizionary award was though appropriate for a "personal" section. If you can discover it, the article may also benefit from some standard information that it does not contain at the moment, such as where she was born, her religion, whether her father is Israeli, etc. Best. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 06:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- You're right. I researched her and then put together an alternate version in a doc that I integrated with this article. In bringing some of it over, I overrode the inline links, the italics, etc. I didn't consider this finished. Just a work in progress - I wll get back to improving this as per the the things you brought up which are already on my list. As for the award, I wasn't sure about creating an awards section with just 1 award so put it in personal. Would it be ok to have an awards section with just 1 award? MaskedSinger (talk) 06:11, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- There were also--less critical of course--a number of non-substantive changes that veered away from MOS, btw. Taking the italics off publications (such as The Jerusalem Post). Changing initial cap formatting, in a way that was not consistent with MOS. Also, some slight puffery, not supported by the RSs, that was added (words such as well-known, frequently, etc.), which is unnecessary and gives the flavor of not being encyclopedic - a flavor we want to avoid, as the content is not puffery, but rather encyclopedic. BTW, if you look at the Alan Dershowitz article, much longer as he is twice her age, you can see that it is appropriate to lay our the positions of an academic scholar. And when you cut out material such as where her parents met, and leave in that they immigrated to Britain, it begs the question as to where they immigrated from. Also, formerly inlined, you have taken the inlines off some names (Columbia Law School, Munk Debate, etc.). I'm not sure why that was thought to be an improvement, but they should be restored I would suggest. And I'm not sure why her Vizionary award was though appropriate for a "personal" section. If you can discover it, the article may also benefit from some standard information that it does not contain at the moment, such as where she was born, her religion, whether her father is Israeli, etc. Best. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 06:05, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- you're welcome. thanks for your help here. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. And again - excellent work uploading the photo. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 05:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- ok will do. thanks. MaskedSinger (talk) 05:42, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Similarly, wp:toomuch is simply an essay. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. It has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. And if applied as it was here, an editor could simply delete all manner of content that they did not want others to be aware of under that rubric .. their subjective view that content, RS-covered, is "excessive". These are her central, oft-repeated, RS-covered views on issues central to her notability. The bald assertion that it is "excessive detail" (or irrelevant or trivial) simply does not resonate here. I would urge reconsideration and restoration, as the only thing that strikes me as excessive here, frankly and with all due respect, is the large deletion. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 05:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, that would be OK. The rule I should mention, if you do so, is to still call it the plural -- Awards. That's simply a convention at the Project. But you can also slot it if you prefer under the Israel advocacy subsection. Either works - your preference. If you want to delete something as being cruft, you might consider "At university, Hausdorff was active in debate." Not much meat in that. 184.153.21.19 (talk) 06:16, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- Ok great. I've got some IRL stuff to attend to so I should get to this by next week. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- just attended to this. took longer than i thought! MaskedSinger (talk) 15:37, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ok great. I've got some IRL stuff to attend to so I should get to this by next week. MaskedSinger (talk) 06:22, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 14 December 2024
edit | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add a space missing from "Oxford Universityand Tel Aviv" in the second para. Clickingban (talk) 06:41, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
