Talk:Sheri Fink

This article is rated C-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 Women writers High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Journalism Low‑importance

AccuracyObessed, please use the talk page appropriately. Please stop removing documented references that are cited from reliable sources. Please stick to the facts. Every aspect of an individual that is properly documented from a reliable source and properly cited can not be removed. Nevertheless, we are working to make certain the facts are correct and documented. The information you removed is documented and properly cited. We are working to improve this page with current information. Schwartzenberg (talk) 03:20, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Schwartzenberg appears to be attempting to vandalize this page. Schwartzenberg appears to have engaged in a personal attack against the subject of this article. Schwartzenberg has included unreferenced and potentially libelous information.AccuracyObsessed (talk) 05:03, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Content disputes are not vandalism. Memorial Hospital Truth is not a reliable source. It is an advocacy website. When you say "We are working to improve this page", Schwartzenberg, that seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of a group. Who are the members of this group? Please be aware that group editing is not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed this:

She also won the [[Dart Award from the Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma]].<ref name="dart">{{cite web| url=http://dartcenter.org/content/deadly-choices-at-memorial#.UwgeZE2PI3E |title= Dart Award |publisher=Dart Center for Journalism and Trauma |accessdate=21 February 2014 }}</ref> This is bestowed specifically on those heeding the [[Journalism ethics and standards|ethical rules of journalism]] in regard to being sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.<ref name="ethics">{{cite web |url=http://www.spjvideo.org/quill/codedcontroversey/ethics-code-2009.pdf |title= Code of Ethics. |publisher=Society of Professional Journalists |format=PDF |accessdate=19 February 2014 }}</ref>

Because it doesn't seem to be notable. There are no refs in Newsbank that mention this, e.g. It seems to me that there should be a secondary source for her having been awarded it. It also seems to me that citing the second sentence to that source is synthesis of some kind.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah|alf laylah wa laylah]] (talk) Thank you for your edits. However, Dart Award is probably worth restoring. It is a highly competitive award bestowed by Columbia Journalism School: http://dartcenter.org/. It specifically honors journalists who report sensitively on subjects of trauma.05:09, 22 February 2014 (UTC)AccuracyObsessed (talk)

Yeah, I have no specific objection to it, but I didn't see it reported in newspapers. Do you have a reliable secondary source mentioning that she got it so that we can feel sure it matters? That would do it for me.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:25, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, alf laylah wa laylah, there are some better references: 1) to the press release: http://www.journalism.columbia.edu/system/documents/149/original/2010_Dart_Awards_announcement.pdf; 2) to Crown Publishers' mention of it: http://crownpublishing.com/news/five-days-at-memorial-life-and-death-in-a-storm-ravaged-hospital-by-sheri-fink; 3) to the Association of Health Care Journalists blog post about the award: http://healthjournalism.org/blog/2010/04/fink-wins-dart-award-for-memorial-story/ AccuracyObsessed (talk) 05:37, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first one's just primary, the second's not independent as her publisher has potentially selfish reasons for promoting it. The third is plausible, but I do wonder why this didn't get in the paper. What do others think here?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I guess there are enough newspaper stories about people getting this award to convince me that the award is worth mentioning; 109 hits on Newsbank for the award itself. It's still weird that there don't seem to be newspaper stories mentioning that Fink got it. I'd be happy enough putting it back in with AccuracyObsessed's third source to support it unless there are objections.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have been overshadowed by mentions of the Pulitzer! AccuracyObsessed (talk) 05:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Placing an NPOV template on a page requires the initiation of a discussion of the issues on the talk page. That isn't happening here, so I removed the tag. The article in its current state seems perfectly neutral to me. If there are neutrality concerns and anyone wants to replace the template, perhaps they'd also be good enough to explain the concerns here explicitly so that they may be addressed in a civilized manner, OK?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the POV content a bit earlier. It was pretty blatant. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:08, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the full name scattered throughout the article? It reads oddly. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:19, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the first name after first mention, per the Manual of Style. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:29, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Cullen. A pleasure working with you as always. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And you as well, NeilN. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:35, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There have been attempts to use [1] as a source in this

Agreed. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 05:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously, you are correct, Cullen.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 05:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]