Talk:Sherrilyn Kenyon
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 is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
Tags
I'm adding the {{likeresume}}, {{weasel}}, and {{unsourced}} tags because this page sounds like a press release for the author. The article is littered with
I've removed the tages listed above. I rewrote the biography completely, with sources, and I think I've gotten all those pesky weasel words removed too. I hope this is a much better article now. Karanacs 20:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
--- It's seems to me that you did a good job Karanacs! 82.46.242.94 20:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
Tone of page?
The page kind of reads like it's a personal website or a fan site. Can anyone change this so it's a bit more encyclopedia like?
Concur a lot. This is essentially advertising copy. --81.157.231.68 (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
- To be precise, it's advertising copy from her website, which is copyrighted. talk) 14:23, 6 May 2010 (UTC)]
"Cited content"
Why are people reverting so hard to preserve content cited to an archived version of the author's personal website, much of which was added at the very inception of the article by an SPA who left it looking like this and never edited again? How much of what is in the current article – apart from the lawsuit material – is actually notable and sourced to an RS? And why are people reverting publication information from the author's personal site? Doesn't WP:ABOUTSELF apply for that? I'm confused. Folly Mox (talk) 03:32, 27 April 2023 (UTC)